Current Security News

Small and medium businesses are constantly at risk of being targeted by cybercriminals, simply because they are smaller than large corporations. The bigger a company is, the more money they have to invest in higher-tech security systems and larger, more involved IT departments. For smaller companies, it is easy to focus on trying to expand business and let security sit on the back-burner. This is where the partnership between Dell and Trend Micro comes in. They have come up with an easy way for small and medium sized businesses to manage their security needs without breaking the bank.

Dell Collaborates with Trend Micro
Trend Micro's Business Security Services include several desirable features to make the security portion of running a business much easier. First and foremost, is a set of web-based tools which make administration extremely easy. There is no need for a dedicated in-office server (or any company owned server at all), and the administration panel can be accessed from anywhere with an internet connection. There is also a remarkably low system performance impact, thanks to the fact that once a scan is complete, the results are processed in the "Smart Protection Network" run by Trend Micro. For companies with little or no IT staff on hand, the system comes pre-configured security parameters and runs automatically, so there is less worry about having something set up improperly. Both desktops and laptops are secured with this software, even if they are used outside the office. Anytime the computer is connected to the internet, it is being actively protected. This has the biggest impact on users who travel with their work, as many do.

This is a big step forward for one of the top PC suppliers in the world. The fact that this software can come pre-installed on systems shipped to its commercial clients means that they can offer security and piece of mind to a large group of people.

Both Apple and Adobe have shipped out relatively large collections of security patches this past week, Apple fixing up OSX and Adobe locking down it's Shockwave player. Both sets of patches have been given a security rating of 'critical,' which means that there is the possibility of malicious code execution on an unprotected system.

Apple And Adobe Both Roll Out Large Security Updates
Apple's update this week fixes code execution attacks when viewing maliciously crafted PDF or PNG files, or even just viewing a document with a maliciously crafted font installed. There is also the possibility for network administrators to abuse their positions by intercepting sensitive data through the use of an anonymous TLS/SSL connection, or to use a similarly named web address to impersonate a legitimate site and steal information that way. For instance, if they are in possession of the domain name www.example.com, they are able to impersonate www.example.com due to the lack of checking the final letter in the certificates. There are also updates for the newest versions of PHP and ClamAV which both claim to include necessary security updates. These updates can be applied via the "Software Update" option in OSX or downloaded from Apple's support site.

Adobe has updated their Shockwave Player to fix several security holes, including 16 memory corruption vulnerabilities which could lead to code execution. These vulnerabilities affect version 11.5.7.609 and earlier, and it is recommended that anyone running these versions immediately upgrade to the most recent version (11.5.8.612) of the software found on Adobe's website. The memory corruption vulnerabilities and four more issues are all labeled as 'critical' in the Severity Rating System. The other issues include two denial of service attacks, one of which could potentially lead to code execution. Also there is a pointer offset vulnerability and an integer overflow vulnerability which can grant one with malicious intent access to plant code in a user's memory.

Earlier this week, HP announced that it will soon be adding Fortify to its list of recently acquired companies. This will be a huge advantage for HP in the security market.

HP to Acquire Fortify
Fortify Software is a company that specializes in software security. Founded in 2003, it has continued to grow and supply Software Security Assurance (SSA) to government agencies and fortune 500 companies in many different industries. Their best known software suite, Fortify 360, is a tool that can root out security issues in software, as well as fix those issues and prevent future vulnerabilities. In February of this year, HP and Fortify released their most recent collaboration, "Hybrid 2.0" which goes to show that there has been no problems between these companies working together in the past.

Once the deal is finalized, Fortify will continue to run as a stand-alone company. Eventually though, they will be slowly integrated into HP's Software and Solutions business. This will allow HP to put a much larger focus on software security in every aspect of the application life cycle. "Businesses operate in a world of increasing security and compliance challenges, and the applications and services that they rely on are core to the problem and the solution," said Bill Veghte, the executive VP of the Software and Solutions branch, in the official HP statement on the acquisition. "With Fortify's leadership in static application security analysis combined with HP's expertise in dynamic application security analysis, organizations will have a best-in-class solution to improve the security of their applications and services."

This is not the only company HP has had its eye on. Just last month, HP finalized its purchase of Palm, Inc. This was meant to increase their connection to the rapidly growing mobile device market. This past April, HP bought 3Com for its computer network hardware capabilities. These companies were purchased for $1.2 billion and $2.7 billion dollars respectively. The details of the deal between HP and Fortify have not yet been disclosed.

Patch Tuesday has come and gone, and with it came the biggest Microsoft Update ever seen since they began their monthly update cycle in 2003. The Windows Operating System as well as Internet Explorer, MS Office, MS Office for Mac, MS Works, Silverlight 2 and 3, the .NET Framework and Movie Maker are all affected.

Microsoft Issues Record Breaking Security Update
There are 14 new security bulletins released this week, 8 of which are labeled as "critical" and the remaining 6 are labeled "important". These numbers do not include the link vulnerability patch that was released last week, although the Security Bulletin Summary does include that patch with the others. Microsoft is assuring people that of these new vulnerabilities, none have been seen exploited in the wild as of yet.

Of the 8 "critical" bulletins, 4 are listed as high-priority, meaning that they should receive immediate attention.

MS10-052 - This bulletin addresses a vulnerability in Microsoft's MPEG Layer-3 audio codecs. Remote code can be executed through specially crafted media files or streaming content from a website or web application.

MS10-055 - This bulletin addresses a vulnerability in the Cinepak Codec. Remote code can be executed through specially crafted media files or streaming content from a website or web application.

MS10-056 - This bulletin addresses 4 different vulnerabilities in MS Office. An attacker can gain privileges equal to that of the user if that user opens or previews a specially crafted RTF email message.

MS10-060 - This bulletin addresses 2 different vulnerabilities in the .NET Framework and Silverlight. Remote code can be executed when viewing a specially crafted web page in a browser which can run XAML Browser Applications or Silverlight Applications, or if the user runs a specially crafted .NET application.

More information on these 4 bulletins, as well as the other bulletins, can be found via the Microsoft Security Bulletin Summary for August 2010.

Microsoft has released a non-standard update to the Windows Operating System. This unusual move was prompted by a slew of highly critical viruses taking advantage of a vulnerability in shortcut links.

Microsoft Fixes Most Recent Vulnerability
On July 16, Microsoft Security Advisory (2286198) was published to Microsoft's website. It explains a problem with the way Windows handles .LNK and .PIF files, which are symbolic links to legitimate programs on a computer. Basically, when the link image was rendered, it allowed the malware embedded in the file access equal to that of the current user and executed malicious code with those abilities. Obviously, users who insist on running with administrative permissions were at a higher risk than those who log on with a regular account.

There are several viruses that have been exploiting this security hole. The first known use of this vulnerability was the Stuxnet worm, which spread via USB drives and stole information from computers running software from Siemens. Since then, there have been other viruses to exploit this same problem. Microsoft blogged about these viruses, including one particularly nasty one known as Sality.AT. Microsoft stated that Sality is "highly virulent," and works by infecting other files, copying itself to removable media, disabling security and finally downloading other malware onto the infected system.

Earlier this week, Microsoft released Microsoft Security Bulletin MS10-046, which is the patch to fix this particular vulnerability. This "out of band" patch came a full week before the regularly scheduled update, due to concern for customers' security. Everyone who has Automatic Updates turned on will already have the patch installed and their system is secured against this particular threat. The only people who need be concerned are those who check for updates manually and those who are still running Windows 2000 or XP Service Pack 2 or earlier, as they are no longer supported by Microsoft.

After all the debate about disclosing security vulnerabilities within software, Google is trying to reshape the process for fixing bugs. There has always been discussion on whether or not responsible disclosure was actually responsible or not, but it came to a head (at least from a media standpoint) last month with the Microsoft/Tavis Ormandy occurance.

Google Pushing To Redefine 'Responsible Disclosure'
This post from the Google Online Security Blog discusses what Google would like to see changed in the current "responsible disclosure" model. Currently, when a security researcher finds a vulnerability in a piece of software, that researcher is supposed to inform the software vendor privately of the risk. The bug is not supposed to be released to the public until a fix is released.

According to Google's blog post, "The emotionally loaded name suggests that it is the most responsible way to conduct vulnerability research - but if we define being responsible as doing whatever it best takes to make end users safer, we will find a disconnect. We've seen an increase in vendors invoking the principles of "responsible" disclosure to delay fixing vulnerabilities indefinitely, sometimes for years; in that time frame, these flaws are often rediscovered and used by rogue parties using the same tools and methodologies used by ethical researchers. The important implication of referring to this process as "responsible" is that researchers who do not comply are seen as behaving improperly. However, the inverse situation is often true: it can be irresponsible to permit a flaw to remain live for such an extended period of time."

This does not seem like the best system to have in place for protection of the end user. Basically, this is saying that because security researchers are not allowed to release details of a bug to the public until there is a fix, there is no reason for the vendor to take action. It also takes notice of the fact that by using the term 'responsible' disclosure, it is barring anyone from breaking with the mold by labeling them as irresponsible.

Despite what it may seem like, Google is not trying to plunge us into a state of anarchy by proposing a full-disclosure method of dealing with bugs. They want to find a balance, where end users receive security updates in a timely manner, and software vendors have enough time to provide those fixes to the users. Their suggestion? A 60 day window between being informed of the vulnerability and having a fix available to to the public. In this situation, everybody wins.

This week, Mozilla released a security update for their popular Firefox web browser. Firefox 3.6.7 fixes several security issues that were found in the 3.6.6 version. Over half of the vulnerabilities fixed were listed as "Critical," which is the highest danger level that Mozilla associates with security issues.

Mozilla Rolls Out Security Update For Firefox
Of the 14 vulnerabilities listed on the Firefox update site, eight are listed as critical. Mozilla defines a critical issue as a "vulnerability [that] can be used to run attacker code and install software, requiring no user interaction beyond normal browsing." Basically, a hacker can run their code on your computer to access your information and install malware on your system. For instance, they list an issue with PNG issues. If you browse a site with a maliciously crafted image on it without clicking on anything, you can get a computer virus.

The way that most of these vulnerabilities are able to execute code on your machine are to take advantage of pointers to unallocated memory. These pointers are caused by array overflows or de-allocating objects with multiple pointers pointing to it. By using these dangling pointers, they are able to put their code into sections of memory that your computer doesn't realize are being used, and therefore doesn't know to protect. Once the malicious code is in memory, it is easy to execute.

The best way to protect yourself is to make sure that your browser is always up to date with the most current software. In Firefox, this is as easy as clicking the "Check for updates..." link in the Help menu, or by going to mozilla.com and clicking the big green button in the middle of the screen. This will update your browser to ensure that you have the best protection for your web browsing pleasure.

This week, Microsoft released a new security patch for issues affecting the XP and Server 2003 operating systems. The vulnerabilities were all related to remote code execution, though only the XP patches were listed as critical by the Microsoft Security Bulletin.

Windows XP Security Patch
On June 5, Tavis Ormandy, a Google security researcher discovered a zero-day vulnerability in Windows Help that he reported to Microsoft. When Microsoft and Ormandy could not agree on the terms of creating a fix, he published the vulnerability four days later, creating a huge media storm. There were people on both sides, some arguing that Ormandy acted irresponsibly by spoon feeding a security exploit to hackers who would use it to cause harm. Others argued that without full disclosure, Microsoft would not have taken this threat seriously and wouldn't act towards fixing the issue.

Whether or not Ormandy was right in his actions, the outcome speaks in his favor. This past Tuesday, Microsoft released Microsoft Security Bulletin MS10-042, which addresses these vulnerabilities. This is an amazingly quick turnaround. The normal time frame for "responsible disclosure" is to allow the software manufacturer a 60 day window to fix the problem before public release. To have a fix only five weeks after the bug was brought to Microsoft's attention makes a strong argument for the proponents of full disclosure.

On the other hand, since the release of this particular bug, Microsoft has reported over 10,000 computers have been affected by hackers using this security hole. This is a significant amount of people being affected by a previously unpublished issue. The fact that it was unpublished does not necessarily mean that it was unknown to the people who could exploit it. It is unlikely that Ormandy was the only person that would ever discover this problem. Thanks to his actions, we now have a solution to what could have become a serious problem for more than just the 10,000 people who were unfortunately targeted.

Apple is in the news this week about the new security measures it will be implementing in the wildly popular iTunes store. Granted, this is not a major security upgrade, but it does help to prevent the kind of security holes that have been recently exposed.

iTunes Store To Receive Security Makeover
This all began when a Vietnamese app developer named Thuat Nguyen's apps covered 42 of the top 50 apps in the app store. This raised a few red flags, especially after people commented on the apps that they never purchased them. After some investigating, Apple determined that Nguyen had obtained account information from 400 accounts with stored credit card information and had used them to purchase his apps from the App Store. He then used these accounts to purchase his apps, driving up sales and his revenue.

In order to combat this type of security breach, iTunes will now require an extra step be taken by its customers. On accounts with saved credit card information, customers will need to enter their CCV code from the back of their card more frequently. That's it. Admittedly, this is not a full security overhaul, but the truth is that that would be unnecessary. The "hacked" accounts are more than likely victims of fishing attacks, as Apple has stated that their servers were unaffected by any kind of security breach.

Overall, the damage caused by this problem was minimal (assuming you are not one of the 400 accounts that were targeted). 400 accounts out of 150 million comes to roughly 0.0003% of accounts worldwide. This coupled with the fact that Nguyen and his apps have been banned from the App Store makes this a fairly open and shut case. For anyone who was affected by this fraud, Apple recommends that you contact your credit issuing agency about canceling your card and issuing a charge back for unauthorized transactions.

These days, with threats of computer hackers stealing data to insurance companies "accidentally" publishing hundreds of thousands of peoples most sensitive information on the internet, data security is a very prevalent issue. A CBS news investigation recently turned up a new source of potential data leakage, the standard office copy machine.

The "New" Paper Trail
Unknown by the majority of Americans, almost every single copier built since 2002 has an internal hard drive which stores a digital copy of each document copied, scanned, or printed using the machine. This can be a useful feature for storing fax cover sheets and other commonly used documents. The problem comes when personal information is copied for office use. For example, doctors making copies of medical records, insurance companies making copies of claims information, or employers making copies of drivers licenses. Each time a copy is made, that information is stored in a way that is easily retrievable by anyone with access to the machine.

There are numerous rental services which rent out copiers to businesses with no set policies on dealing with this kind of security. Some offer to scrub the hard drive when it is returned, but they can charge up to $500 for the service. There are also refurbished copiers for sale containing data from any previous owners. At least in these cases, the owner has physical access to the machine to be able to take steps on their own, such as purchasing an encryption service for the internal hard drive, or their own data deletion tools. What is more worrisome are the copy and print shops where there are no guarantees on document security. Anything copied there is stored on their machines, where it is unlikely that any measures are taken to wipe the drives on a regular basis, if ever.

If your office handles private information, or anything else that doesn't need to be shared with others, steps should be taken to make sure that the information stored inside your copier is safe. There are usually services available from the manufacturers to have the data removed from the device after each job is completed, or at least encrypted, although this can significantly add to the cost of the machine.

Due to widespread concerns about its thoughts on users' privacy, Facebook has been under all sorts of fire lately, facing criticism from U.S. senators, European data protection authorities, and many tech experts. Now, yet another problem's cropped up, as Facebook's been called a top target of phishers.

Facebook Becomes A Favorite Target Of Phishers
The Securelist division of Kaspersky Labs issued a report yesterday, and the identities of the top three organizations that have been targeted by phishers may not come as a surprise to anyone; they're PayPal (with 52.2 percent of all attacks aimed at it), eBay (with 13.3 percent), and HSBC (with 7.8 percent).

The report, which covered the period between January and March of this year, next stated, though, "Facebook popped up unexpectedly in fourth place. This was the first time since we started monitoring that attacks on a social networking site have been so prolific."

By way of explanation, the report then continued, "Having stolen users' accounts, the fraudsters can then use them to distribute spam, sending bulk emails to the account owners and their friends in the network. This method of distributing spam allows huge audiences to be reached. Additionally, it lets the fraudsters take advantage of the social networking sites' additional options, like being able to send different requests, links to photo's and invitations, all with the advertisement attached, both within the network and to users' inboxes."

Obviously, this isn't good news for Facebook's users or the security community as a whole. Facebook acts as a sort of point of entry to information about a whole lot of people (the social network had 400 million users in early February).

This isn't good news for Facebook, either, though - nothing that makes its users uncomfortable or unhappy, and therefore likely to leave, is - so perhaps we'll at least see the company make some attempt(s) to address this problem.

Anyway, if you're curious, the list of phishers' targets picked up after Facebook with Google, the IRS, Rapidshare, Bank of America, UBI, and Bradesco.

As huge corporations go, Google's a pretty cuddly one, but according to the search giant itself, everyone should be careful about offers of employment or wealth that involve its name. "Google Money" scammers represent a growing problem that the company is trying to combat.

Google Goes After Impersonator Scammers
A post on the Official Google Blog announced today, "[D]espite hundreds of consumer complaints and our own efforts to keep these sites from tricking people, some scams continue. To fight back, we're working to stop various fraudulent 'Google Money' schemes, and this week filed suit against Pacific WebWorks and several other unnamed defendants."

The post then added, "[W]e're still working constantly to remove scammy URLs from our index, and we'll permanently disable AdWords accounts that provide a poor or harmful user experience, whether or not they use Google's trademarks illegally."

The problem continues to exist, though.

So fair warning: The scams are known to operate under names like the Earn Google Cash Kit, Google Adwork, Google ATM, Google Biz Kit, Google Cash, Google Fortune, Google Marketing Kit, Google Profits, Google StartUp Kit, Google Works, and the Home Business Kit for Google. From there, they tend to be fairly standard make-money-from home affairs.

As always, stay sharp.

A report issued by a U.S. Senate committee only uses the word "scam" when quoting different consumers; the report's title employs the phrase "aggressive sales tactics," instead. Still, it looks like a number of big online companies have been caught profiting off people's confusion.

Senate Uncovers Online Credit Card Tricks
An investigation ordered by Senate Commerce Committee Chairman John D. Rockefeller IV discovered that Affinion, Vertrue, and Webloyalty "gain access to online consumers by entering into financial agreements with reputable online websites and retailers," according to the official report.

Then, "[T]he three companies insert their sales offers into the 'post-transaction' phase of an online purchase, after consumers have made a purchase but before they have completed the sale confirmation process. These offers generally promise cash back rewards and appear to be related to the transaction the consumer is in the process of completing. Misleading 'Yes' and 'Continue' buttons cause consumers to reasonably think they are completing the original transaction, rather than entering into a new, ongoing financial relationship with a membership club operated by Affinion, Vertrue, or Webloyalty."

So individuals wind up paying $9 a month, and companies make millions. Millions upon millions, really. 1-800-Flowers.com, Buy.com, Priceline, and US Airways (among many others) were all given more than $10 million by Affinion, Vertrue, and Webloyalty. Barnes & Noble, eHarmony, and Pizza Hut received between $1 million and $10 million.

It's a bit scary to see this sort of trickery employed by such mainstream organizations. Hopefully the committee's report will force them to clean up their act.

It might not be long before we return to the days of schoolchildren diving under their desks in warfare preparedness drills. Only now, instead of hiding from nukes, the kiddos may be unplugging their computers, since McAfee has indicated that a cyberarms race is taking place.

McAfee: Cyberwarfare A Big Threat
Dave DeWalt, the president and CEO of McAfee, said in a statement, "[S]everal nations around the world are actively engaged in cyberwar-like preparations and attacks." These include China, France, Israel, Russia, and the U.S., and it's no secret that the members of this group aren't all on great terms.

What's more, cyberwarfare's barrier to entry is so low in comparison to traditional hostilities (a roomful of computers vs. thousands of men, tanks, and airplanes) that lots of other countries are almost sure to pursue the idea.

Then, if and when the virtual bullets start flying, things could get really nasty. McAfee reported, "Attackers are not only building their cyberdefenses, but cyberoffenses, targeting infrastructure such as power grids, transportation, telecommunication, finance and water supplies, because damage can be done quickly and with little effort."

At least this state of affairs would create a good job market for security professionals. Everybody else might benefit in a physical manner from the dive-and-unplug exercises, too.

It's sometimes fun to be an early adopter, as the long lines and waitlists for things like iPhones and the new Camaro have proven. But where security products are concerned, do yourself a favor and let other folks go first, since a fresh report indicates that it can take more than a single try to get things right.

ICSA Labs Finds Flaws In New Security Products
ICSA Labs, which is based in Pennsylvania and has been around for 20 years, tests and sometimes certifies products. Emphasis on "sometimes."

An ICSA Labs Product Assurance Report indicated that just 4 percent of security products attain certification following a first round of testing. Most have to try again between one and three times before making the cut.

And it's not guaranteed that a product will ever meet the necessary standards, either. According to ICSA Labs, only about 82 percent of products attain certification in the end, meaning about one-fifth of all applicants (and perhaps a much larger percentage of products) aren't up to snuff.

So leave the shakedown cruises to less cautious individuals. Just repeat "patience is a virtue" a few times and read reviews while you're waiting, and remember that things will be less likely to blow up in your face when you finally get onboard.

No one's sure how many there are to go, but according to a Nigerian official, there are about 800 scam email addresses and 18 criminals that can be considered "down." Mrs. Farida Waziri, the chairperson of a government agency, announced that some shutdowns and arrests occurred thanks to an initiative called Project Eagle Claw.

Nigeria Announces Early Results Of Anti-Scammer Initiative
Nigeria's Economic and Financial Crimes Commission is the force behind Project Eagle Claw, and with Microsoft's help, has just started ramping it up. Waziri explained in a statement, "We expect that Eagle Claw as conceived will be 100% operational within six months and at full capacity, it will take Nigeria out of the top 10 list of countries with the highest incidence of fraudulent e-mails."

She then gave some very interesting details, continuing, "[U]pon full deployment, the capacity to take down fraudulent e-mails will increase to 5,000 monthly. Further it is projected that advisory mails to be sent to victims and potential victims will be about 230,000 monthly."

Anything Nigeria can do to address the problem of scammers operating from within its borders will of course be good for the country's image. More than that, it might help honest Nigerians become part of the online world (since some entities have just taken to blocking troubled regions as a whole).

Then there will be the benefit to the rest of the world, with maybe millions of dollars not getting lost. For that reason, Project Eagle Claw is likely to gain a lot of fans.

When considering where to live, it's wise to look up stats about an area's climate, the cost of living, and its proximity to other important stuff in your life. Symantec's MessageLabs recently supplied some information about your odds of getting spammed, too.

MessageLabs Names Most- (And Least-) Spammed States
Somewhat surprisingly, the states you might imagine as being the "most wired" - California, New York, Washington - weren't at the top of the list. Instead, the state in which spam represents the highest percentage of all emails received is Idaho, with 93.8 percent.

In an email to SecurityProNews, a Symantec/MessageLabs representative then listed the other top states (in order) as Kentucky, New Jersey, Alabama, Illinois, Indiana, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, Arizona, and Maryland.

The U.S. territory of Puerto Rico wound up on the opposite end of the list, followed by Montana, Alaska, Kansas, South Dakota, Tennessee, Vermont, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, and Florida.

We're not quite sure what to make of these findings; the states don't appear to be ordered according to Internet penetration rates, GDP per capita, overall population, physical size, or anything else. Still, if you're looking to move, now you have a better idea of how to decrease the odds of getting bombarded with spam at your new home.

A Dutch company known as the Frame4 Group has created what's almost the computing equivalent of a Center for Disease Control lab. The Malware Distribution Project is, according to its own site, the "world's biggest private malware archive."

Enormous Malware Archive Creates Stir Don't jump to the conclusion that the project's run by a bunch of supervillains; the malware samples are supposed to be "offered for the purposes of analysis, testing and malware research."

Also, customers are screened, and a monthly access fee of about $1,235 should act to keep out some of the riffraff.

It actually seems possible that the Malware Distribution Project could be of great help to the security community. When you consider that medical researchers don't have to wander from house to house, asking people if they have cancer, every time they want to start a new experiment, certain practices start to seem a little outdated.

There is a potential for problems, though. One nightmare scenario relates to the Malware Distribution Project's figurative walls failing and everything getting out. Having all of that malware run amuck at once - particularly if security researchers' computers were the first things it'd come across - would be bad.

Then there's the possibility that some unpleasant person would gain access to the Malware Distribution Project's archive and just sort of go on a shopping spree. This way, some relatively stupid hacker might be able to get his (or her) hands on the most sophisticated viruses in existence.

As you might imagine, the Malware Distribution Project is definitely proving divisive.

Anyway, at last count, the repository contained a whopping 3,336,503 files.

UPDATE (10-13-09): Anthony Aykut, the Managing Director of Frame4 Security Services, got in touch with SecurityProNews this morning to pass along some information. In an email, he wrote, "[T]he malware is neither downloadable via the web site or accessible in any other way via the www; in fact, the (secure) servers where the malware is stored (or analyzed/processed) is not even connected to the outside world."

Aykut also stressed that nothing is sold to the public, and added, "Largely due to the security measure(s) mentioned above, and also based on to the fact that the storage media are protected by biometric devices, getting access to the MD:Pro archive is, well, pretty impossible."

Perhaps people who like to spend their spare time in the cockpits of imaginary F-16s should be left alone. The man in charge of a flight simulator site that was attacked claims to have identified the hacker and forwarded information to the authorities.

Avsim Hacker (Maybe) Brought Before Cops Avsim is one of the best-known flight sim communities in existence. It's been around for a long time, too. Unfortunately, a hacker managed to wipe about a decade's worth of modification info and forum posts from the site's servers back in May.

Now, though, Tom Allensworth, the publisher and CEO of Avsim, has told the BBC, "We . . . have incontrovertible evidence of the individual that performed the hack. We have protected the forensic evidence and provided that evidence to the London police. We are committed to bringing justice to bear on this case."

Allensworth is confident in the outcome, too, adding, "We fully expect that the criminal complaint . . . will result in the perpetrator spending some time behind bars - under UK law." (Since Avsim's located in the US, this means he's not pushing for extradition or anything of that sort.)

Neither London's Metropolitan Police Service nor the accused individual (who hasn't been publicly named) has made any comment yet.

The next time you have something really important to tell someone, consider whether a drive over to his or her house wouldn't be a nice way of spending a few minutes. One reporter has found that it's quite easy (and perhaps all too common) for people to buy email accounts' passwords from hackers.

Email Password Hackers Present Real Threat Tom Jackman wrote in an article for the Washington Post, "[S]ervices as YourHackerz.com are still active and plentiful, with clever names like 'piratecrackers.com' and 'hackmail.net.' They boast of having little trouble hacking into such Web-based e-mail systems as AOL, Yahoo, Gmail, Facebook and Hotmail, and they advertise openly."

Jackman found that prices for passwords range from around $30 to $100, which means that even the average ten-year-old can probably afford these hackers' services.

Plus, unless someone important is involved or things get rather serious, law enforcement isn't terribly likely to look into (or at least resolve) the matter, because accessing a computer without authorization is just a misdemeanor in most areas and tracking down a perpetrator can be difficult.

And it doesn't help, of course, that all of these facts have now been publicized in a widely-read newspaper.

So if you've got some nasty business rivals or psycho exes, at least try to play it safe by changing your password often for as long as you're in the person's sights. Then there's always the option of putting a few more miles on the odometer, too.