Hacking Targets for 2011

Lots of ads for computer security seem like they are focused on high powered executives and wealthy people. The conventional wisdom seemed once upon a time to be that the top of the technical world in equipment, programs, security and device solutions are where the online security risks are the highest. But today, the anonymity of the portal is one of the goals a hacker or identity thief is trying to capture from unsuspecting hacker victims.
The only people who need to be concerned with security are tech workers, computer geeks, and high level scientists, right? Wrong. Any small business owner, teenager, or FaceBook user can become the casual target and exploited hack of the marauding thieves online today. And the lower the expectations of identity theft, the easier it will be and more encouraged the hacker will be to see how far they can go.
Home computer networks still make attractive hacking for malicious online thieves. The extension of a computer network may be easier than the original target device. The wife’s computer or daughter’s cellphone of a company employee, for example, might be the first step towards destroying home network integrity.
The threat of a hacking seems to only haunt the rich and beautiful, newsworthy and scandalicious. Sienna Miller, Jude La, and countless other beautiful people and celebrities have had their cellphones and voice mails hacked, recorded and broken into by salacious reporters looking for a story. But even as famous Fleet Street newspapers go under in the wake of a massive hacking scandal, many more modest hackers continue their daily activities.
But there is a more practical and realistic reason to guard against personal device hacking and computer drive and activity tracking by unobserved and unauthorized persons. The theft of personal records can allow them to be used in another format or manner without your authorization. That small business payroll database could be used to set up a dummy business full of “legitimate” individuals. And a computer that is vulnerable can be earmarked by the hacker for a future check back to see what’s cooking.
Your personal device usage is information to marketing companies, research to psychological and commerce bureaus, and entertainment to the mildly curious. But in the wrong hands, your casual browsing activities, word searches, search engine results and pattern of online activities can be made to look suspicious, criminal, or unsavory. But the use of the computer as an origination device for further mayhem is the real use hackers are looking for, over and above immediately useful financial access data and personal information.
How can this be a threat you, the mild-mannered individual? Because the utility of a hacked machine is no longer limited to the direct interest of the hacker. The hackers can now work all day and all night to deliver a bevy of indirect launch site devices to third parties planning a strategic online attack.

Lots of ads for computer security seem like they are focused on high powered executives and wealthy people. The conventional wisdom seemed once upon a time to be that the top of the technical world in equipment, programs, security and device solutions are where the online security risks are the highest. But today, the anonymity of the portal is one of the goals a hacker or identity thief is trying to capture from unsuspecting hacker victims.
The only people who need to be concerned with security are tech workers, computer geeks, and high level scientists, right? Wrong. Any small business owner, teenager, or FaceBook user can become the casual target and exploited hack of the marauding thieves online today. And the lower the expectations of identity theft, the easier it will be and more encouraged the hacker will be to see how far they can go.
Home computer networks still make attractive hacking for malicious online thieves. The extension of a computer network may be easier than the original target device. The wife’s computer or daughter’s cellphone of a company employee, for example, might be the first step towards destroying home network integrity.
The threat of a hacking seems to only haunt the rich and beautiful, newsworthy and scandalicious. Sienna Miller, Jude La, and countless other beautiful people and celebrities have had their cellphones and voice mails hacked, recorded and broken into by salacious reporters looking for a story. But even as famous Fleet Street newspapers go under in the wake of a massive hacking scandal, many more modest hackers continue their daily activities.
But there is a more practical and realistic reason to guard against personal device hacking and computer drive and activity tracking by unobserved and unauthorized persons. The theft of personal records can allow them to be used in another format or manner without your authorization. That small business payroll database could be used to set up a dummy business full of “legitimate” individuals. And a computer that is vulnerable can be earmarked by the hacker for a future check back to see what’s cooking.
Your personal device usage is information to marketing companies, research to psychological and commerce bureaus, and entertainment to the mildly curious. But in the wrong hands, your casual browsing activities, word searches, search engine results and pattern of online activities can be made to look suspicious, criminal, or unsavory.

But the use of the computer as an origination device for further mayhem is the real use hackers are looking for, over and above immediately useful financial access data and personal information.
How can this be a threat you, the mild-mannered individual? Because the utility of a hacked machine is no longer limited to the direct interest of the hacker. The hackers can now work all day and all night to deliver a bevy of indirect launch site devices to third parties planning a strategic online attack.

Top Five Wallet Risks: Is Your Wallet Threatening Your Identity?

The type of material one carries in one’s wallet tells people who you are and what you make, where you live and how you spend. But in the wrong hands this could be deadly. Your Social Security Card, pay stub, occupational health membership card, even your health membership card can be used to social engineer a password or reset at a moment where your email account is compromised. Hackers are that clever, and in this world of online job competition they are motivated indeed.

1. Too Much Information

Take a look at the information inside your wallet. The worst type of identity slacker has their computer password or even printed out documentation with their passwords on it folded inside. This is the mother lode to a hacker looking to hack your corporate account by way of your personal email account. Little strips of paper and notes tucked inside for later use can be forgotten, but a hacker has plenty of time to figure out why they are so significant to you.

Solution: Carry a sport version of your everyday full wallet. reduce the full wallet and use it only during travel or International commerce, such as stock exchanges, border travel, or purchasing cruise tickets or anywhere you’ll need passport level documents with you. Keep a drawer in your desk with spare bit  of addresses passwords, and other task reminders. If you think you need the information somewhere in your everyday travels, transfer it in code to an email. A hacker won’t even know what it means in a sentence or subject line but you will.

2. Stacking the Deck

Another crime of wallet stuffing is carrying every credit card you ever got in a rubber banded stack. This can let thieves know you won’t miss one if it goes away or if you copy them the job you’ll have canceling every card will give them enough time to run up some charges. Hackers have bogus mail drops they can ordered goods delivered. Do NOT keep blank checks in there “just in case”. Keep your checkbook separate or have your wife carry it in the purse.

Solution: review what cards you carry every day and slim down the deck.

3. Layers Upon Layers

If you can’t tell tell by one look at the cards in your wallet what is missing, reduce down the number of cards and information you carry. Just trying to check if everything is there could take another ten to fifteen minutes hackers can use to set up a bogus account and use it to qualify for charges. Pickpockets know to steal the cards and information behind the visible layer. A man finds he left this wallet behind and has no idea someone has looked through it and seen what cards he has, what car he drives and his work and home address.

Solution:

4. Schedules

That work schedule or the department’s work layout plan?  Thieves really want to get their hands on these. This shows where you will be (and where your car will be left unattended) and when certain co-workers of yours will be present or not. Why do thieves and hackers want to know when you are not at home? because they can drop by you place and use your router or hack your desktop.

Solution: Keep your schedule online in a scanned version or text yourself pertinent days and hours you need to be at work.

5. The Phone as PDA

Think twice before committing a lot of sensitive information to your portable device or planner. If your phone is stolen, what will be more compromising, the renewal of phone service, activation of a new device, or chasing all the Internet access services you accessed by phone? And how much information about you social network is in there? Hackers usually start with emergency contact data, since this is a close relation to you and subject to being more vulnerable to social engineering.

Solution: carry either your cellphone with ID scanning and smart payment option  and some cash or your wallet, but not both. That’s two payments methods muggers can steal that hackers can enjoy all night long online. Or at least make sure you use a password on your phone that hackers can’t break.

Social Network Background Checks

Like the freedom of speech the Internet allows? You may wish you had never heard of Facebook once your brother, mother, or fine self hit the interview circuit for a new job. Being able to Google is fun, but for someone to be able to Google you has its pitfalls. And once the Facebook  hits the fan….well.There goes the neighborhood. But this phenomenon stops being amusing when a job search is underway. Depending on who has reposted your remarks, photos, or blogs online, you may suffer from having a subjective set of eyeballs looking over your recreational posts, profile details, and other online material.

Screening spam comments off your blog page or weeding out unfamiliar faces from your social network queue is just the start of pruning your online presence for career growth. Maintaining a positive social network profile shows potential employers you know how the system works. And making sure nobody has kited your identity or spoofed your persona for a “fake” social network account is a good way to prepare before the interview.

Malicious people (like hackers) may see an online notice that someone is interviewing at “XYZ” corporation, and next day they have already mocked up an account with your name on it. The account miht have copied your pictures, yet have content  trash talking the XYZ corporation. Skilled hackers would even use your name to post blog and forum comments online using your own name. Hint to job seekers: if someone in the company can Google your name and find negative comments about the company, you won;t get hired.

Unlike the conventional background check of recent decades, which spans childhood educational institutions to adult career milestones, today’s check is a social network background check. And the results may not be something you or your (potential) employer can live with. The selection committee for second interviews may even forward the link to others in the company to demonstrate your lack of soundness for the job. Conversely, a history of Twitter tweets, Wall posts and business media group network comments can illustrate that you are who you say you are.

That picture of your boyfriend drunk? His new interviewer or their management committee may be able to view it, thanks to the server archives of many social network sits. Imagine your entire second interview set of contacts looking at your friend’s comments on your pictures at the beach in Mazatlan last year, or in Germany in a bar. And social network background checks can also be used to farm friends of friends network’s and see who you know and who the people you know online know too. Once a bad impression is made, very little can be done to counteract this.

Worse, if anyone copied the picture onto another site or puts it up on a  fake account, you could be kissing that salary good-bye. One way to get around a social network check is to disable or erase an account. Starting a new account clears away fresh photos and details and profile things you don’t want people to see. Despite the urging of privacy activists, many social network users still have public settings on many of their user groups and landing pages. One good way to see how much information available is to purchase a search yourself from information companies vending profiles online.

And the problematic material may not be from you, specifically. Companies can afford to be awfully choosy these days about who they hire. Social network checks are not just about trash talking the company or joking about avoiding taxes. But now the Federal Trade Commission has approved these for business use. And hackers can still use social network profiles to chase your home desktop IP address and invade your privacy. Imagine losing a job because hackers falsely posted comments and photos that made you look bad. Imagine job seekers running neck and neck for the same job hiring them to do it. Still don’t want to change that LinkedIn profile password again?

That’s right, social networking isn’t just for kids, hackers and slackers anymore. Device privacy, cellphone interactive accounts, and password management is more critical than ever before. For those slow to come into the social network era, this could be a wake up call. Don’t let an adverse social media network profile lose you a job.

Booz Allen Hacked By Anonymous

The government contractor working on a campaign of counter terrorism got hacked by hacktivist supergroup Anonymous, reports the U.K. publication The Economist. The Church of Scientology and the corporate evil like Monsanto can be understandable targets, and even Rupert Murdoch has earned his place in the hall of Shame. But what did Booz Allen Hamilton do to earn the hacking community’s ire? Booz Allen is a security firm with classified inteligence handling clearance, evidently no problem for a hacker group to penetrate.

Evidently the cybercommunity found out that Booz Allen Hamilton was trying to foster a network of forum posters called “sock puppets”, ready to log on and make posts and comments rife with disinformation. As Booz Allen Hamilton was poised t begin their counter terrorism effort, Anonymous struck them down by hacking the supposed 90,000 military email accounts used. The privacy for these users or their accounts is no longer secure. This is in a company where an executive vice president is a former NSA chief.

This act illustrates the pervasive saturation of the online world with hacking and also the seriousness of the threat for any company trying to use the Internet for their own purposes. With domestic needs at an all time high, and $300 million going n ghost ships the Navy never used, cost watching is at a premium. This is the age of the Internet and online media. Why didn’t federal spending regulations require any cyberactivity contract accountable for online operations of a reasonable caliber? Is a social network forum post now an act of the United States government?

Anonymous, together with Lulz Security, is becoming almost a brand name for Hacktivism, the online hacker activism seen when groups attack or hack a website for moral or justifiable reasons. Can citizens look forward to being protected by the missteps of large companies and behemoth corporations due to the effort of these hacker groups? The government needs to be wary of its contractors proclaiming online capability while foundering after one attack.

Analysts comment that the Booz Allen server crack didn’t take much effort. The SQL injection method easily broke the servers, which experts say were not set up to be defensible to even amateur level hacking. This renders the desktop security and online privacy of every user on that network now corrupt. The invoice that the hacker group sent the company? $310. The potential value of a secure government subcontractor’s computer network?

Priceless.

MurdochGate: The Hackers Hacking the Hackers

The truth will out, and in the case of the British telephone hacking scandal it is coming out with a vengeance. The Murdoch company News Corporation has been publicly accused of telephone hack practices and intercepting communications, and in a growing British media crisis Rupert Murdoch and son James were ushered before Parliament this week to give an account of themselves. (There goes the knighthood).

Last month, Rupert Murdoch was still a powerful media titan poised to take over BSkyB, but today he claims in a press statement to have been “humbled” by the criminal proceedings. A grave faced Murdoch stepped before the highest British lawmaking body in the land to answer questions about his knowledge of hacking practices at one of his newspapers. Witnesses have yet to name Murdoch directly for their hacking activities.

Headlines now include Murdoch himself avoiding scandal by taking the high road and claiming to be “humbled”. But how humble can he be while claiming to disavow involvement yet claim capability to run BSkyB? Murdoch may be less humbled than he seems, given that as the titular head of the company, every head can be chopped before he takes the blame for anything.

Two British police authorities have stepped down, and further investigation by British authorities is pending. Actions into the matter have yielded even more damning evidence that local police in the triple digits have (or have had) professional associations, job experience, and ongoing “quid pro quo” relationships with News Corp over the course of their careers and currently. This is an open embarrassment to both British city police and Scotland Yard, which claims jurisdiction over criminal activities and investigations across the U. K.

Careers of many police individuals in Britain, but not Murdoch’s, are ending over this hacking furore. U.K.’s Prime Minister  Cameron has as a crony  the News of the World UK editor  Rebekah Brooks. Miss Brooks will be questioned before Parliament as well as others in the ever-growing phone hacking and invasion of privacy reported worldwide in recent weeks. Yet Murdoch’s media sophistication and evident business savvy over decades of ruthless ventures has many public and private citizens wondering if those lower down on the News Corp food chain will take the rap for Murdoch’s ambitions. (And everyone is lower down than him).

Shares of the (Murdoch-owned and led) News Corp were down about $15 last closing. Press statements regarding confidence in Rupert Murdoch has been positive, but as the evidence is given, deals made, and possible immunity given to Brooks and others, statements directly naming Murdoch as both knowledgeable and supportive of the hacking techniques of the journalists may be evinced. Lulz Security seems almost to act in the public interest going where Parliament can’t, and hacking News Corp sites.

Hacking Truth to Power

In the face of such limited evidence it may be very hard for a British jury or court to convict  Murdoch. But with this scandal, any arbitrator or judiciary panel will find it hard to believe Murdoch did not know how reporters at News of the World UK were obtaining essentially private details of celebrities such as Hugh Grant, Sienna Miller, Jude Law, and others.

If not, members of Parliament and UK citizens want to know what organization of the company made Brooks and others responsible while the CEO Murdoch remained unconnected. Were  corporate management and legal firms uninvolved in policy making decisions that shielded Murdoch from being accountable? Legislation may be enacted on both sides of the pond to prevent communications interceptions from happening again without serious penalties to the fostering institution.

A Parliament seat is the type of honor a career media titan such as Murdoch would have been seeking as the culmination of his business career, yet the chances for that seem slimmer than ever. His Range Rover was mobbed, ironically by reporters, as Murdoch and his son James came to testify before Parliament. Observers of British media remember when Murdoch was wavering between appointing his son James or daughter Sarah chief of his new media empire, which includes American assets Fox Broadcasting Corp, and the Wall Street Journal. Things could have been so different…

Whose head will roll instead of Murdoch”s? That of Brooks, evidently. The publisher of the Wall Street Journal, possibly the most sacred of elite business watchdog publications, has also stepped down due to this scandal. In the face of a real investigation, more yet-unearthed victims may come to light. Murdoch’s lasting contribution to media may not be the one he had planned.

Why were the media and the authorities so slow to catch on? Why did police foil or turn away those who would complain or file charges against the newspaper for violation of privacy? And how will Murdoch be held accountable if his lawyers outrun the current laws? This is the question Britons are asking their government. The heretofore quashed reports in London and worldwide media regarding the hacking, and other suspicions, were quelled by an aggressive press campaign through the end of last year, concurrent with the BSkyB takeover offer.

The  “journalism” inquiry, which may span as many as 3500 victims, is now a public matter. Deeds done to get the story may end up being the story themselves. Cameron’s time in office as Britain’s Prime Minister may be tainted forever by the malicious actions of reporters working under the dictates of a ruthless media czar, albeit filtered through editors and management infrastructure.

But most damning was the online pressure brought to bear on the websites of News Corporations’ newspaper the Sun and others, as well as other websites owned by News Corp. Citizen Murdoch  now has his own Big Brother.  The Lulz Group, a hacker collective, was responsible for PBS and others hacks. Lulz is now attributable for this hack and  allegedly targeted Murdoch’s house organ websites and redirected them to a article online proclaiming Murdoch dead.

But as with the publishing on world-famous Wikileaks type sites, the public favor is swerving from the side of the affronted. As the Fox broadcasting Titan, UK publishing behemoth, and wealthy entrepreneur Murdoch stood to answer for his companies this week, individuals all over the world are wondering if the law is the same for such a media king.

In this case, the invasion of privacy by the Murdoch owned News Corp. was tempered by an answering volley from Lulz Security.

Wonder what Bart Simpson would have to say about that?

Murdoch May Get Hacky-Sacked

The results of the public outcry and moral outrage in Britain’s hacking scandal is reaching epic proportions. Making headlines, ironically, was Murdoch himself, trying to put a good face on the public splattering of his News Corp  media empire’s business practices. The growing appetite among the pubic for a reckoning may take the bite out of News Corp no competitor ever could.

These newspapers have blared scandals from Prince Andrew’s liaison with an underage American girl to Fergie’s vending of access to Prince Andrew’s trade powers. But the reporters went too far, no doubt egged on by imperatives from higher-ups serving Murdoch’s interests. Now the British press has a new scandal to report on: their own. News Corp may finally have met its match in the public eye.

Reports are still filtering in, as headlines and newest reports overlap each other. The editor of the former Rupert Murdoch newspaper, News of the World UK, had been arrested. This woman has been accused of influence peddling in connection with her being hosted by the British Prime Minister Cameron at the official residence, Chequers. Worse, an editor from News of the World UK has been on staff at Cameron’s offices in the meantime.

How much information did the Fox titan Murdoch’s company get illegally, and how much of this was suppressed by Scotland Yard? The sacked hack reporter/editor and a host of other staff formerly working at the newspaper may be ever more accountable both to the public good and the law. Can News Corp and its entities get relicensed for broadcast with these rumors and scandals and charges swirling? Can there be an end to the News Corp rise?

News of the World UK, which was closed by Murdoch after 150 years in business, has been at the center of this hacking scandal. Breaking into telephone and voice mail accounts and arranging recordings is illegal. But the assumption that Scotland Yard would look the other way has been tested and found unsound. More and more questions have been asked every day about why movie stars like Jude Law and Hugh Grant are suing the weathy billionaire’s News Corp media company for cause.

The editor commingled with Minister Cameron but has now been fired, ostensibly for Murdoch’s curtailment of the scandal. Murdoch thought by shutting down the paper he could rid himself of the scandal. arrested. A London police chief has resigned. The growing investigation into what was proffered as a media wide industry practice in investigative journalism may turn out to be the straw that broke the camel’s back.

A new era of legal protections may be the fruit of the invaded privacy of certain Britons. The suffering of both Lady Diana’s mortal end, fleeing from press photographers, and the death of a kidnapped U.K. girl,whose parents were misled by journalists hacking her voicemail, be the spur to make legislators and law enforcement officials take action.

In America, corruption is part of capitalism. We expect our commercial entities to be operating between the lines. But the FCC and the FBI may find that Murdoch’s organization may have hacked into the accounts of victims of 9/11. But Britain retains the viewpoint their media titans be sacrosanct and hoisted on a moral pedestal.

Practices harking back to the Lady Diana audiotapes, hacked phone calls and even telephonic eavesdropping on the future King of England have been tried for the last time. Those above the law assume they can practice damage control in emergencies. Murdoch has smiled his way through reporter mobs and bought full page ads. But the fix this time is not in.

In this case, Murdoch’s full page apology in the British newspapers may not be enough to quell a growing criticism in his BSkyB deal and overall fitness as powerful media chieftain. And perhaps the everyday hacker, without Murdoch’s budget and finesse, may think twice about hacking the next time around.

Postal Mailboxes Not Safe

People worry about their wi-fi connections and computers, but mailboxes seem off limits to tampering. The sight of post office boxes in concrete seems secure enough to pick up your mail without a tiny suspicion of theft. But seeing several 400 pound mailbox units stolen? It boggles the mind it could have happened unobserved.

Recipients (or, non-recipients) of lost mail must wait thirty to sixty days, in some cases, for lost payments, mail, documents, or systems to reproduce them. There may be no replacement process for some important items lost or stolen. And the remedy may come to late. Hackers and thieves can do a lot with virgin credit cards with magnetic strips just off the presses.

What was the motive for the theft? Perhaps the identity thieves knew that certain important items impossible to reproduce were being sent through the mail. The post office cautions people from sending valuables, edibles, and harmful materials, but people still sent them through the mail. No one will ever know now if these thefts were done to intercept items sent to the mailbox owners, or prevent other time sensitive documentation from getting through.

Reports like these should remind anyone using the mail to use theft insurance or other services like couriers for critical items. Persons sending items of monetary value should use commercial vendors such as Federal Express or UPS for items that cannot be replaced or reproduced without significant money loss, delay, or inconvenience. Some mail policy for losses mean that items purchased via Ebay, for example, are gone for good without remedy.

Entire multiple mailbox units were stolen. This was done in three places without anyone seeing it done! Paired with online access to your email or telephone access to your voicemail, some serious account tinkering, fraudulent credit card activity, or bogus check writing might be happening.The receipt of checks and payments by mail just got riskier. Now the thieves have stacks of documents with which to work from.

People can pose as you or produce entire stacks of mail supposedly for ‘you” when impersonating you in a deal, point of sale credit transaction, and/or credit card fraud.

The rising incidents of crimes like this make checking your credit report an absolute must. From trash or junk mail thrown away, hijacked email address access, and information from Facebook and online searches, criminals can now apply or credit or worse, false documents of any kind and then just steal the bins the mail comes in. If this was planned as part of a identity theft ring, it’s a good bet entire identity generation plan was completed for a person or persons with those mailbox addresses.

The mail bins were lifted right out of the ground. That’s someone who wants your mail and probably has a bad reason for taking it away. Thieves are getting bolder than ever. Bolted into concrete slabs in the Burbank, Pacoima and Glendale areas of Los Angeles in Southern California, these huge mailbox units and the mail inside them are long gone. And area authorities also report recent thefts of outgoing mailboxes after the pick-up deadlines.

Think you can never be hacked? Try telling that to the people whose mail was in the mailboxes recently. Federal officials are looking into the theft of large blocks of postal boxes removed physically from the premises of the post office property locally. Standing in the post office, this seems unthinkable. Any one of those post office boxes could have been full of falsified documents whose application was part of a grander scheme.

This puts a new spin on the concept of clickjacking, password hacking, wi-fi interception and router leapfrogging. Any one of those mailbox identities could be complete now with snailmail credit cards and possible driver’s license copies and passports etcetera. This is the last step in a no doubt concentrated plan to hijack the identities of many people complete with new credit cards and identifications. The last step in ordering fake credit cards, scam bank loans, phony documents like birth certificates and duplicate ATM cards is intercepting the hard card in the mail.

All a hacker needs to do then is dial up the vendor and “verify” receipt of the credit card and set the PIN number, often using a number on the printed material sent through the mail. If the accounts have business credit lines or raised credit limits with company spending amounts, the exposure to the victims of fraud could be huge in this case. Authorities can expect any or all of the persons to whom the post office boxes were registered to experience issues with identity theft in future.

Law enforcement can’t keep up with theft like this. They can’t track phony charges until the bills come due and are not paid, and then the accounts are moved to collections. The credit card owners may not even know they have the phony credit cards. They may get hassled at work or even have charges on their credit record from a theft and not know the underlying reasons. For anyone with a post office box or an unmonitored or unsecured (by closed camera) mailbox, this should be a wake up call with respect to identity theft.

Prince Unvaliant

The right to privacy in the United Kingdom is all but gone. As unhappy parents in the United Kingdom recently found out, even the voice mails from their dead kidnapped daughter are not sacrosanct from the prying investigative eyes. The Rupert Murdoch scandal over the privacy issues and unauthorized delete of voicemails, despite frantic and expensive efforts to quell it, keeps growing. At question is the investigative reporting techniques and intrusions into private voicemail, text, and other media of private people and celebrities.

As the subjects of England, Scotland, and the other Republics within the British Empire of 2011 are learning, when a media giant instructs his business underlings to get the job done in any way or shape possible, they can get away with it. Rupert Murdoch is that media giant, and he is getting away with it. And with the acquisition of BSkyB, Murdoch’s scope of “inquiry” will broaden to untold dimensions.

Who will stop it? This month, British government employees are expected to go on strike. The British “civil servant” is an underpaid defender of ethical freedoms, and is probably outspent by Rupert Murdoch by a thousand to one. The sophisticated legal underpinnings of the defense of these charges is miles away from Murdoch himself, who yet unquestionably holds the reigns of his media empire. Soon, the UK may fall behind the Murdoch Curtain. But a figure such as Prince Andrew might have been able to sail into the breach and carry the day, if his own honor had remain unsullied.

Murdoch will soon be the face of every device, phone, TV channel and satellite news feed. Can cyberterrrorism of a corporate stripe be far behind? Scotland Yard seems faintly to bestir itself. The sucking sound in this part of the government shows not only that Britain is out of touch but selective in its approach to solving problems. And this is a vulnerability that hackers, malware, and viruses love to exploit.

Can it really be expected that Britain would be as commercially savvy and wary of internet hackers when such out-of-touch of a personage as Prince Andrew is their national trade envoy? Queen Elizabeth has newly invested her son with the honor Grand Cross Knight of the Victorian Order, an unimpeachable credential that clears him of wrongdoing and leaves his industrial trade missteps smoothed over. (These people don’t care about your web hosting problems).

Prince Andrew is one of the cover stories of Vanity Fair this month, as an especially dubious national trade ambassador. Prince Andrew, Duke of York, is embroiled in the type of scandal that would cause any other person to lose their job. This is one of the stories that Rupert Murdoch’s newspapers might involve thousands of taped or illegally obtained voice mail recordings, emails, texts or pictures to titillate the modern sensibility with. But cynical onlookers can detect a whiff of corruption and power beneath the gold braid and greying fringe of a former golden boy.

Even British MP’s now question Andrew’s behavior. But who will carry the standard against Citizen Rupert, and rally to broach doubt over Murdoch’s suitability to take over big media? Murdoch is poised to acquire BSkyB, one of the premium brands in British media, amid a furore of unethical business practices challenges in context of the phone hacking activities Murdoch’s news organization practiced in their investigative research.

In the news story, published to a shocking reaction in the United Kingdom, the second son of the Queen of England is factually accused of peddling influence for trade favors.Prince Andrew is pictured visiting a New York man with a background in illegal sex charges, and a February 2011 news story features just the kind of juicy details tabloids love, regarding an underage girlfriend for the Prince. This news item is filled with the type of Fleet Street journalism and unauthorized private background detail that one of Rupert Murdoch’s tabloids might use their phone hacking skills to obtain.

Where does the British government stand with respect to policing their computer networks on the Internet, and what can their effectiveness be if their control of print media tactics is so sloppy? Scotland has been reviled for overlooking the practices and allowing them to seep into everyday norms within the media industry. These types of commerce standards are just the ones which hackers can exploit. With a privileged, skirt-chasing bozo in charge of British trade, what level of security can the average web hosting customer obtain?

If Andrew can’t command the respect of a monarchy-loving fanbase of royal-watchers, things have changed for Britain. How will Internet hackers, clickjackers and online thieves treat the privacy of anyone who might be involved in his activities?

It doesn’t take an imaginable leap of commercial savvy to assume that with such “authorities” involved, the notion of international security is pretty much by-your-leave. This makes UK based servers and hosting companies a risk for some sites. What if your server was taken down at the physical layer? Would you be able to get someone in Britain to actually administrate a fix? What if your online enterprise depended on media frameworks online from server hotels that share service with Rupert Murdoch’s rack space? The threat of privacy being violated and liberty extinguished is happening via online or unsecured wireless access

The webmasters now launching continental websites with redundant hosting in Britain may be at risk. With these legal borders blurred, anyone can easily tap into international systems and hack traffic. But modern web hosting customers need to be concerned that the servers containing their data may be a target for the intended hack of another company who is also a customer. How will web hosting customer be advised if the threat of a complex, sophisticated hacking attempt, (many germinated from clickjacking and password detection) occurs, and what is their expectation of how reassignment of files, backup procedures, and reassumption of core operations will happen?

Hosting company workers easily joke about their access to file activity, server logs, and physical rack space and cabinets of company equipment servers in the wire hotels. But what if your company’s files happen to be located in a wire hotel where the FBI shows up to take shared hosting equipment along with the dedicated serves of the malware or hacking targets exploited? What happens if your shared hosting coincides physically with details or data thieves or hackers want? Malware or computer virus activity can destroy physical data storage in a manner that is unrecoverable.

And the burden of proof is on the person whose privacy is violated, who may not even know their data has been unlawfully stolen, listened to, or saved to archives to displaced without their knowledge. Just contacting a lawyer and getting a consultation, setting forth charges and pursuing legal action is beyond the purview of all but the most wealthy companies or individuals. Think about the complexity and cost this would incur, even if the smoking gun were found, after an intrusion on your server or into your online VPS happened.

All one of Rupert Murdoch’s reporters need to do is decide your data, email, or phone messages are important for them to know. If British security couldn’t detect and wouldn’t report or pursue phone hackers, how limited can their capability of sophisticated computer intrusion detection? And God forbid Prince Andrew, or any other Royal is involved, because obviously the British establishment wants to protect its favorite son or any other Lord. That puts a web customer third, not second, in line for getting online security issues handled.

By these means, online fraud can skyrocket. Private files, company transaction archives, and secured packets of information can be hacked from their targets. If one hacker doesn’t have a use for the data, they can find someone who will. But the avid pursuit of news stories mimic the exploits of hackers in their blind investigation into another person’s privacy, riding roughshod over a person’s desktop privacy or device privacy simply because their boss has told them to.

The role of Internet privacy should be adjudicated by an internet Czar. But Britain doesn’t have one. The aggressive pursuit of the 2012 London Olympics by the British establishment is a curious counterweight to the lapsed role of British commercial authority over the Web. What international trade is Prince Andrew responsible for? What business school did he go to? The position of Prince Andrew, a junior naval officer, in a sophisticated trade role, is questionable. The key to his role is access, the same kind of access that his former wife was filmed peddling to undercover operatives of a Murdoch owned publication last year.

Prince Andrew as an industrial Czar is ludicrous. His wife, the former Duchess of York, is one of the most public social disasters in decades, with a recent entire miniseries currently showing on Oprah about her personal financial ruin despite marrying one of the world’s richest men. Usually when a ceremonial joke is appointed, there is an opposite number in British civil service who actually handles the chores, but in this case there is a vacuum in the crossover role between British governmental oversight of Internet operations and commercial Web company representation. This role needs to be filled, and fast, before Murdoch unleashes his clearly everyday hacker type investigative operations to servers worldwide.

Britain currently suffers from one of the worst anti-cultural ground-level isolationist campaigns of popular “colonial” sentiment in recent decades, thanks to terrorism, 9/11, and the real estate mortgage crisis. The mood of the people is not happy. The government has spent a fortune on the Olympic Games for London 2012 and many other areas of commerce and public works have fallen by the wayside. (In such a climate, disgruntled wire hotel administrators or hosting employees will welcome the extra cash to look the other way when the company network or data servers are being hacked).

The placement of England at the top of the continental shelf functions as a melting pot for all fleeing refugees from political regimes around the world, one Europeans can get to in order to escape less friendly regimes at home. Their surviving class system also provides a moral framework that makes low level employees vulnerable to outside influences. And these outside influence, be they foreign governments, religious extremist regimes, or reactionary hacker organizations with a point to make, can furnish cash to extend their plans and achieve their agendas.

As in the case of Sarah selling access to Andrew for money, cash talks. The unthinkable possibility that Andrew was involved is not that unthinkable, considering the company he keeps. A coterie of dealmakers paid Sarah’s massive debt, and they are owed favors. One guess who has the mojo to pay off those favors. If a Prince of the realm is for sale, how uncorrupt do you expect your average wire hotel bandwidth watcher to be?

And the people monitoring your server, if your data racks or files stand somewhere in the United Kingdom right now, are at the mercy of employees with the ability to keep it secure. What if those employees think your data might be worthy of a reporter’s look-see? What if your company records or email communications end up mirrored on a unemployed tabloid reporter’s home computer a year from now? British authorities don’t seem to have the matter in hand.

Britain’s need for trade with international commerce partners is at odds with the cultural sentiment of its native ethnicity. British wants its heritage and its hegemony over commerce, and with the current politics and policies in play, thsi won’t work. The hardworking individual has given way to the smooth New Media corporo-politician texting his lawyer and his publicist at the same time. This person wouldn’t take your call if he had “60 Minutes” cameras in his office. But web hosting customers worldwide have better online security sources, more private server choices, and more trusted file storage options and can exercise them.

British people still want to be the elite class wielding the upper hand in all business relationships, and with respect to pricing, supply, and competition to secure terms, they are no longer first among equals in various industries. Unless security of media in Britain improves, and privacy can be guaranteed, commerce will drop and trade will suffer, expecially with respect to web hosting. Unless the British government makes a public stand against Murdoch and his underling’s hacker practices, the continued advisability of using British web hosting is unadvisable and unsure.

What Office Managers Need to Know About Hacking

Office Managers are the ones responsible for policing computer operations in the workplace. They also have a hand in purchasing new equipment, maintaining assets logs, and managing inventory control of existing devices belonging to the company. But on a whole different layer, they exist to oversee and detect office policy regarding Internet authorized use, hacking activity, and desktop privacy for the company interests.

1. Hacking is Opportunistic

Almost every hack job that turns into a renowned exploit begins as a crime of opportunity. hackers have a malicious observation skills which find and maneuver around known security limits. Even someone who has never intended to be a hacker may become one when the right mixture of motivation, opportunity, and methods become available.

The wrong set of employees working late can pool enough passwords and access experience to hack a mainframe. Keeping a physical exit log and reviewing it can save time when equipment is missing or software doesn’t work. Knowing there is a trace on when they leave from workplace premises can make employees think twice about performing unauthorized computer

2. Everybody Watches the Fence

I.T. staff are responsible for setting up fences and curbs to unauthorized activity. This might be access of a physical device, use of a mainframe, or logging in using another employee’s account. But every workplace has its own custom skein of strength and weaknesses where the computer systems and Internet access is involved. The everyday needs of the company necessitate certain tools be used, a fair amount of forgiveness is tolerated, and the limitations of the computer network and its capabilities are generally acknowledged.

When these limitations become known the hackers are born. Office managers need to be aware of employees surfing to much on the web, invading the files of another server, or cruising the server networks for whatever they can find. When the fence goes down, people alerted to their free zone of mischief will act. What happens before they plunge into the abyss defines a company’s computer security profile. This can mean keeping your job as an office manager.

Keep software licenses and passwords securely. Track software problems on specific computers and decipher why they recur. Make sure secondary lines of defense for the company firewall, database systems, and network servers are intact and working at a moment’s notice. Hacking can occur simply because a talented individual can’t resist the urge to get the better of the company machine.

Office managers need to stay objective and ask question regarding the behavior of every employee. Do the activities of a given employee online or in their cubicle exceed their purviews in terms of systems access and mapped drive destinations? Do certain employees seek out excessive “privacy” for their normal work? Do they become nervous if others look on? Do they refer to third party materials or emails from non-employees to operate system software? Does their boss know why they send so much time after hours and on weekend in the office?

3. Follow the Money

Office managers may be so busy watching the forest they may forget to guard the trees. But managers have a responsibility to safeguard customer privacy. Companies work for a profit. Profits come from sales. Sales come from customers. Customers are sources of money. Sources of money are the focus of many hackers, thieves, and petty criminals.

Office managers need to know which employees have a good idea where the best version of the customer database is, or where the customer sales records and charge card records have been filed, or where session data is stored.Customer records are now worth money, no questions asked, by third parties online all over the world.

Bank records, purchase orders, even Fedex account numbers can be used for unauthorized reasons. Invoices, statements and letters can signal something is unusual with the account. Are these channels being intercepted? Physical control of these files is necessary. A lot of related correspondence with sensitive data can also be included for reference in manila files. Insurance companies and law firms keep manual logs of who is using the files of confidential materials and why.

With a ghosted IP address and a invisible server, a hacker can mimic the source location of a customer and originate new transactions the card holder knows nothing about. Normal security programs may not flag this activity because the purchases come under the heading of repeat business from a known customer. But disgruntled employees on their way out or with a past in the company can easily engineer these transactions, leaving the company holding the bag.

4. Unpoliced Systems Attract Flies

A main activity of hacker teams is to check and recheck the security settings of corporate firewalls and servers daily. Never assume a system left unpoliced for network administration will be safe. In the network of Internet hackers today, there is no “under the radar” anymore. Troubleshoot mirrored servers and then only install with full backup copies made, support on hand, and protocols engaged.

The Corporate Workplace Security Quiz 2011

Take this quiz to find out how backwards your company’s online security, vulnerability to clickjacking, and desktop fraud is.

1. The website has been hacked. The reboot of the computer system after resetting the IP address and moving the company website takes about ___ minutes.

A) 15 minutes.
B) Three days of talking on the phone to the boss’s cousin who made the website three years ago.
C) Four people to read the manuals and one long customer service phone call to the people who originally made the website, who charge an additional fee for the reset.
D) Impossible without the network system admin, the boss, and some guy who bought the computers in the first place who no longer works for the company.

The best answer is A.
The move of a hacked website to a new location with new passwords and security parameters should be child’s play. But company devices should be checked daily for intrusions.
Information Services must have a hackproof battle plan to deal with violated computer spaces.

2. The likelihood of finding unauthorized downloaded games, files or movie codecs on your company desktops or laptops is at __ %.

A) 5%, because the daily drive subroutine on all company devices cleanses and reports extraneous files daily.
B) Somewhere between 10% to 95% depending on whose computer it is.
C) Basically 0%, unless Randy in IT is a friend of yours.
D) 50% among the younger employees, about 5% among the older employees.

The best answer is A, and not C. Special access by the IT staff is a common workplace security problem. Getting on the good side of the information technology staff is a common way for hackers to buddy-buddy their way into network security secrets.

These rogue programs create opportunities for other administrators to get into computer root files. One way to sabotage a company is to delay their productive operations by causing computer problems. If a company psychology is to go on cruise control until computer problems are fixed, a competitor can get a two week jump on their business.

Imagine an escrow office who is two weeks late on daily escrow file closings and paperwork. Their competitors will snap up business while the company owner debates spending the money the computer experts to fix the computer network.
Guess who pays the bill for fixing them and lost time sent reproducing work, not to mention the cost of new devices?

3. Replacing a company computer in case of theft is contingent upon…..

A) How much the boss has on his credit card that week.
B) Completely a 100% possibility.
C) Possible only after an insurance follow-up, company investigation by an outside firm, and police report.
D) Depends on how important the person is to the office productivity.

Best Answer is C.

Employees and their pals know when a company just buys another computer or replaces it with a better newer model. If the perception among the staff is that the company can afford to buy another computer, they will let the message get out one way or another. IP addresses can be pirated easily and “ghost’ identities used because employees leave computer logged on all night.

If staff know they will not get another computer, they will lock their desk, not leave it in the car, or forget to use wire locks at the workplace. Thieves know that laptops jammed from the desktop workplaces can be sold to fences for 15% cash. And if employees know a private detective might follow up, they might think twice before faking a “theft”.

4. When the office manager discovers that three laptops are missing from the office, they assume it is the work of a burglar or hacker-based gang of thieves.

A) Yes, 77% of workplace theft belongs to petty criminals.
B) No, in-house theft is about 50% an inside job or related to personnel access.
C) The office manager is right. No employee would take their own computer because it is to much work to catch up.
D) Every computer theft or workplace crimes is in its own separate bubble of cause and effect, motivation and opportunity.

The Best Answer is D.
Every computer theft can be an inside job, a faked excuse to not turn in undone or sloppy work by a deadline, to misdirect attention elsewhere (security staff are sloppy, the office is not secure, etc., etc.). Each theft is a separate case and no assumption can be made.

Employee on employee sabotage can also be a motive for theft. If another employee is competitive with the one missing a computer or one with their system down, they can deliver the data or fulfill their work obligations better. What if Barnes in accounting loses his laptop because he didn’t get their work done? The stonewalling of an employee to cover a missed deadline by disappearing their own computer is not unheard of.

5. An executive director of a 30th floor office puts in an emergency cash request for a new laptop, at a rush. He/She is upset to find that the assistant’s laptop was stolen from a locked desk drawer. The assistant swears they locked the computer inside before they left, but have no witnesses to leaving without it. But the executive director supervises a large staff and needs their assistant to get another computer immediately.

A) The assistant probably took it.
B) The executive may have stolen it.
C) The cleaning people probably found a way into the desk.
D) Thieves got into the office and got it.

Best answer is B.

An executive might need extra cash or want a computer for a kid in college. A disgruntled employee might be stealing resources to set up their own company. Security staff might have their own angle, carrying equipment out under the eyes of people whose paychecks they sign. All of these people may suddenly have new passwords and computer access to places they shouldn’t once a device is stolen.

The executive may be involved since they have facilities access to another key to the desk, have physical access to the assistant’s desk drawer, and unquestioning access to the assistant’s office space at any time. The executive also can be in the office at unscheduled times with additional scrutiny or security walking to his/her car alone. The director is also more embarrassing to accuse, whereas blame might be directed a a lowly staff member such as an assistant and get them fired.

6. The exterior workplace security for your office in case of theft, intrusions, and unauthorized workplace access is “adequate”.

A) No, there are no external cameras at all, nor any security staff onsite watching people walk to cars or exit the building.
B) Without a lobby coordinator, guard, or timed access keycard, employees come and go with guests and unannounced visitors, carrying anything they want, anytime they please.
C) All of these statements apply.
D) Thieves surveying the premises can easily see that only a forced door or smashed window stands between them and a bevy of office equipment, including computer hard drives with passwords and saved Internet activity and cookies.

Best answer is C.
These kinds of small business scenarios make targets out of one person offices or small companies. Small to medium businesses may cut costs and scrimp on security.

The people living close to the business know more about the staff leaving than the people running the business. The blind parking lot permits any kind of theft, especially at late night hours or if a truck or van blocks the visual angle from the curb. Police taking a theft report will goggle at the invitation left out.

7. Security guards will prevent almost all theft except armed theft and pure Internet intrusion and device programming violations.

A) Yes, provided an affordable company is used.
B) Only when rotation of staff and bonded employees are used.
C) Yes, and prevent physical employee theft as well.
D) Yes, especially when long term guards know the employees well.

The best answer is B.
Bonded staff have a record following them around from job to job tracking trustworthiness handling goods and premises for security purposes. Rotation of guard staff prompt guards to ask questions and give employees who cannot be trusted another reason to choose another day to carry out a laptop or hide supplies in a purse or attache case.

8. Employees at your company have never been subjected to physical pat-downs, purse checks, laptop bag or backpack searches, and escorted pointedly out the door without “packing up” for the evening.

A) True.
B) Only police have the authority to search a backpack or purse.
C) Company guidelines and policies stipulate at-will employment which will be terminated if the employee does not submit to a guard or supervisor purse check or backpack search upon demand.
D) Employees consider their work laptop “theirs” and under privacy restriction and not subject to search.

Best answer is C.
Employees should have no reason not to submit to purse and backpack checks or even physical pat-downs by guards if the situation warrants. make sure employees are reminded that laptops are not “theirs”. Employees must know they are subject to termination if they do not willingly submit to this action. Use of a carry-out permit signed by a supervisor can eliminated “misunderstandings”.

9. Document Control procedures at your office are…..

A) Nonexistent.
B) Optional shredders are provided.
C) Networked printing and a closed circuit camera reviewing printing, faxing, filing and shredding activity takes place hourly.
D) People in the office might notice if you print out a novel, but perhaps not.

The best answer is C.
Office workplace printing by employees of non-work related material gets very costly. Employees print shopping, travel, or hobby information and bleed printers dry of ink. Paper refills can be costly and time intensive to refill. A networked central printer lets everyone know their jobs are noticed for frequency, size, and type.

By the time the big contact must be printed out, the employee is furious to discover mountain of unclaimed print jobs and an empty cartridge. But since not every office can afford this level of security and this type of protection, networked programs that log printing activity should be used.

10. The boss knows without talking to anybody who has taken their laptop home that night (for any purpose) and who has not.

A) Yes.
B) No, employees pretty much do whatever they ant.
C) Laptops are supposedly secured for weekends in an officewide policy, usually.
D) The boss has no idea who is using their computer at home and what they are doing with it outside office time.

Best answer is A.
Many workplaces do not exercise adequate laptop security exterior to the actual workplace. this allows employees to get sloppy, forgetful, careless or malicious. Make a policy that all employees leaving for home or leaving the office must text a central email address that they are removing office equipment (such as computer laptops) and for how long (overnight/weekend/lunchtime). This is a facilities priority for asset management.

Make it a further policy that anyone whose laptop is stolen without this notification is responsible for its replacement cost and subject to termination as well. review what reasons people take home their devices and make sure employee know that unnecessarily risk might mean disciplinary procedures (i.e., the employee went clubbing at bar with the laptop bag on him, the employee left the laptop in a car in view in bad area checking out a dive).

Unauthorized computer access after hours should be a termination offense. managers should review acceptable use policies for computers for employees. The IT department can program hourly IP checks to see what computer are being used online and from where. This can substantially reduce theft occurrences, and profile workers who are security risks.

Powered by WordPress | PalmPreBlog.com offers free Palm Pre themes. | Thanks to Best touch screen phones, Video Game Soundtracks and Homes for Sale