Technology News
Carrie-ann Skinner
Security vendor Sophos has slammed a technology experiment in which a British scientist infected himself with a computer virus.
Dr Mark Gasson from the University of Reading infected a computer chip implanted in his hand with the virus and then transmitted it to a PC to prove that malware can move between human and computer.
Gasson uses the chip as a security pass to gain secure access to the university building, and to activate his mobile phone.
He said the implications for computer viruses in implants are far-reaching, and could potentially affect those with pacemakers and other medical devices.
Someone with an infected chip implant could potentially infect someone else, while a person with two devices under the skin could run the risk of viruses passing between the two chips, he said.
However, Sophos says that while it is possible to put any software code onto an RFID chip, the code would not be read until an RFID reader came into contact with the affected chip.
Furthermore, the software connected with the RFID reader itself would need to have a security vulnerability in order to allow the malicious code to be run.
“Scientists should be responsible in how they present their research, rather than hyping up threats in order to get headlines,” said Graham Cluley, senior technology consultant at Sophos.
“Any virus code on the RFID chip would be utterly incapable of running unless a serious security hole existed in the external device reading it. RFID chips normally just have data read from them, rather than ‘executed’, so the chances of a virus infection spreading in this fashion is extremely remote. ”
Cluely added he had “more chance of being flattened by a falling grand piano than I have of getting my dog infected by a PC virus next time I take him to the vets”.
“The main progress that appears to have been made from such research is not a contribution to computer security, but a full-proof method of ensuring that university staff don’t forget their office door pass in the morning,” said Cluely.
“Predictions of pacemakers and cochlear implants being hit by virus infections is the very worst kind of scaremongering.”
Emma Woollacott
The Times Square car bomber was aided in his attempt by the fact that he was wearing shoes, leading to a call from two US senators to make people register before buying footwear.
Oh, sorry, we meant prepaid mobile phones.
Under a bill proposed by Chuck Schumer and John Cornyn, buyers would have to show ID and vendors would be required to keep the information to allow law enforcement bodies to trace the phones.
“While most Americans use pre-paid mobile devices lawfully, the anonymous nature of these devices gives too much cover to individuals looking to use them for deviant, dangerous means,” says Cornyn.
“It would be foolish to stand idly by while the risk remains that another terrorist or criminal could purchase a pre-paid phone leaving no paper trail.”
Apparently, the fact that “terrorists, drug kingpins and gang members” use prepaid mobile phones makes them inherently dangerous. They’re used by other dodgy people too, says Cornyn – including hedge fund managers and Wall Street executives implicated in the largest insider trading bust in US history.
Quite a few countries already require registration, including such bastions of individual freedom as Indonesia and Singapore. There have been calls to do the same in several states. But Schumer and Cornyn believe there should be a nationwide requirement.
“We caught a break in catching the Times Square terrorist, but usually a prepaid cell phone
is a dead end for law enforcement,” said Schumer. “There’s no reason why it should still be this easy for terror plotters to cover their tracks.”
One out of every six mobile phone users have experienced “bill shock”—an unexpected jump in their monthly service fee that was not prompted by a change in their calling or texting plan. That’s 30 million Americans all told, according to a new survey released by the Federal Communications Commission.
These nasty surprises aren’t the kind of multi-thousand dollar hikes that have been making headlines in Europe and sometimes here in the United States. “Nevertheless, we know from our consumer call center that for many, many people in this country, a jump of $20 or $30 or $50 on your cell phone bill is a very significant jump,” Joel Gurnin, Chair of the FCC’s Consumer Task Force told reporters at a Wednesday press conference. “We did find many people who were experiencing bill shock in the range of $50 or $100 or more.”
15 percent of these “shocks” cost consumers from $25 to $49 more on their bill, the report says. 14 percent cost from $50 to $99. Another 23 percent cost over $100.
The survey also indicates that half of cell phone users and almost two thirds of home broadband subscribers are lost in the woods when it comes to Early Termination Fees—the price tag for dropping their plan. Bottom line: they often don’t know how much their ETF is. In many instances, they don’t even know that they have one.
“I think the most striking finding is that so few people know what they are,” Gurnin noted.
Did not know
The FCC commissioned Abt/SRBI and Princeton Survey Research Associates to interview 3,005 American adults about these matters from April 19 to May 2, 2010. Among the report’s major findings:
- 17 percent of respondents (one out of every six) said that their cell phone bill suddenly increased, even though they hadn’t switched plans.
- 84 percent of those in the “bill shock” category reported that their mobile service did not contact them, even as they verged on exceeding their call minute, text, or data plan.
- 88 percent said they received no message from their carrier after the sudden increase.
- 54 percent of personal cell phone consumers knew that would have to pay an ETF if they quit, but 18 percent disclosed that they did not know about the fee.
- 21 percent of home broadband customers were aware of an ETF condition attached to their plan, but 38 percent were not.
“Among personal cell phone users who said they were subject to an ETF, 47% did not know what the amount of the fee would be,” the study added. “For home broadband users who said they would have to pay an ETF, 64% did not know the amount of the fee.”
Major reasons
The survey also suggests that ETFs “may also play a role in consumer behavior” when a subscriber is trying to decide whether to switch plans. 43 percent of respondents who did know about them confided that their ETF represented a “major reason” they stayed with their current carrier. 18 percent said that paying an early fee was a “minor reason” they didn’t switch services. Another 34% said the ETF played no role in their decision.
This is all in line with a recent Government Accountability Office report that concluded that 42% of cell phone users don’t switch, thanks to fees.
“I think the major take home message from all of this is that people don’t know what they should know in order to be able to manage these kind of fees in the best possible way,” Gurnin told reporters. “We do know that there are some carriers out there who are beginning to alert their customers when they’re heading into bill shock territory. But it is certainly not yet a common practice. We would like to see some of these best practices become universal practices.”
Reporters asked the FCC whether all this data would translate into regulations or just attempts to encourage the wireless industry to move into the “best practice” camp.
“We really can’t say at this point whether this all will result in a rulemaking or voluntary standards,” Gurnin explained. “We have begun some conversations with industry. I think that the importance of this survey is that it gives us a common ground of understanding.” And: “We’re really confident that we can work in a way that the industry will support that gets out information in a way that is ultimately good for everybody.”
Very troubled
Good luck with that, given the wireless industry’s response to the report.
“I am very troubled with the current direction the FCC is taking with respect to the wireless industry,” Steve Largent of CTIA – The Wireless Association, told us. “It seems the Commission is going to attempt to micromanage what is an incredible array of choices for consumers. From prepaid to postpaid, subsidized handsets to unsubsidized, contracts with ETFs to those without, large, medium or small buckets of minutes and ‘all-you-can-use’ plans, consumers have an unbelievable range of choices.”
“Unfortunately, the Commission’s release missed an opportunity to educate consumers,” Largent added. “Nowhere mentioned in the documents is there any information for consumers about how they can better manage their wireless usage – information that is readily available from every carrier and that has been submitted to the Commission by CTIA and carriers.”
The FCC’s materials did come with a tip sheet on dealing with ETFs, but to be fair to CTIA, the trade association may be dealing with “report shock,” following the release of the agency’s 14th wireless industry competition survey last week. The study very conspicuously noted that over the last five years, concentration in the industry has gone up. The two dominant providers, AT&T and Verizon, now enjoy a 60 percent chunk of revenue and subscribers, “and continue to gain share,” the compendium noted. This might result in the FCC pressing some “policy levers” on the wireless industry, the document hinted.
Largent’s commentary lamented “the message sent last week in the Mobile Competition Report to today’s survey release.”
Reporters also asked the FCC whether the agency was going to make any effort to tabulate the size of ETFs and their impact, given AT&T’s announcement last Friday that the telco is attaching $325 in early fees to its iPhone.
No go on that, it seems.
“Increases in general . . . I wouldn’t want to single out any one company,” Gurnin explained. “Different companies adjust their ETFs up or down. It’s really an overall issue that we’re looking at. Our issue is clarity and disclosure to consumers.”
Apple has moved up to seventh place overall, more than doubling first quarter shipments from 2009 to grab 2.7 percent of the mobile phone market. “Growth came partly from new communication service providers in established markets, such as the UK, and stronger sales in new markets such as China and South Korea,” said Carolina Milanesi, research vice president at Gartner, in a statement.
Global smartphone sales grew even more than last quarter, with 54.3 million units sold for a 48.7 percent year-over-year increase. Smartphones now represent 17.3 percent of all mobile phone sales, up from 13.6 percent in first of quarter last year.
Symbian still commands a large, though continually eroding, market share among smartphone platforms, shedding another 4.5 points of share. BlackBerry is holding strong at number two, losing about one point year-over year. With little innovation in its current incarnation, Windows Mobile also shed a few points as well. WebOS’s poor showing left it lumped in the “other” category with other niche platforms.
The big winners are, as is becoming commonplace, iPhone OS and Android. iPhone OS market share improved considerably year-over-year, with its 112 percent unit growth enough to move it up to 15.4 percent among smartphones globally. However, a staggering 806 percent unit growth pushed Android well ahead of Windows Mobile into fourth place. Both iPhone OS and Android are poised to catch up to the BlackBerry platform in short order. Apple will have its work cut out for it to stay ahead of Android globally, even as the open source mobile platform has by some accounts surpassed iPhone OS-based smartphones domestically.
“To compete in such a crowded market, manufacturers need to tightly integrate hardware, user interface, and cloud and social networking services if their solutions are to appeal to users,” Roberta Cozza, principal research analyst at Gartner, said in a statement. “Just adding a QWERTY keyboard will not make a device fit the communication habits of today’s various consumer segments.”
However, Cozza said, “mobile OS ecosystems are developing and will move beyond smartphones to continue to deliver consumer value and a rich user experience.” Apple strengthened its iPhone OS platform by using it to power its iPod touch and iPad mobile devices. Android runs a few similar devices, mostly e-book readers, but it has yet to make a big move into the tablet or PMP space. However, Android will also face competition with Chrome OS in the tablet market. HP announced that it will definitely expand the webOS platform into the tablet space after its acquisition of Palm, but the desktop PC market leader has its work cut out for it.
Jaikumar Vijayan
As CEO of LifeLock Inc., Todd Davis has been in the news lately for all the wrong reasons. Two months ago, the Federal Trade Commission slammed his company with a $12 million fine for deceptive advertising practices.
Attorneys General from several states have dubbed his company’s identity theft protection services a scam. And this week, the Phoenix New Times reported that Davis had been a victim of identity theft at least 13 times, even while he has been busy pitching the effectiveness of his company’s identity protection services.
In this interview, Davis, who is famous for publicly posting his Social Security number on billboards and TV commercials to promote LifeLock, vigorously defended his company and himself. Far from being a scam, Davis insists, LifeLock has been a game changer that has shaken things up in an industry once tightly controlled by the three major credit reporting bureaus.
People are wondering how the CEO of a company which sells identity theft protection services could himself be the victim of identity theft 13 times. What would you say to them?
Here are the facts. We have always said that no one can completely stop identity theft, including LifeLock. We have said on our Web site since inception that there’s no lock that can’t be picked if you were to spend enough time or money. But by going out there and putting ourselves and me specifically, out there with a bullhorn giving out my Social Security number, we got people talking.
We affected a massive change in the industry. Hell, we created the industry. Before, the best service you could get was credit monitoring that you could buy from a credit bureau that sells you a copy of your data that they sell to other people. Now, because of LifeLock, because we’ve stirred the debate, we’ve made the bureaus change their offerings, we made competitors elevate their game for the first time ever. We knew when we started this process that I was going to have issues that would have to be resolved and remediated. We never tried to make the claim nothing would ever happen to me.
What new industry did LifeLock create exactly?
I truly mean identity theft protection. I mean proactive services that attempt to mitigate the risk of identity theft before it happens. Not like credit bureaus which sell your data to you and to anybody else who is qualified to buy it. We were the first ones who actually began to put up a front line of defense to lessen the chance of identity theft.
You talked about the 13 times that we have remediated some kind of issue with me and my identity. [People] have tried hundreds and hundreds of times to steal my identity. The front line of defense works dramatically better than me just waiting for someone to send me a copy of my credit report after I’ve been a victim. We’ve made consumers ask for the first time ‘what can you do to stop it before it happens?’
Some have accused you of being over-enthusiastic in your claims about your service. The FTC hit LifeLock with a $12 million fine two months ago for deceptive advertising. What’s going on?
I am passionate about what we do. [The FTC] didn’t like our choice of words … so they wanted more clarity. For over a year they have been absolutely fine with the way we market our service and what we provide. The fine has to do with historical ways we advertised, not for anything we have done for over a year or for anything we do today.
By the way, one thing you’ll notice in all these stories is, where are the ticked off consumers? If we overinflate what we do, where are all the ticked-off consumers? Because I promise you, New Times doesn’t like us.
Are you are telling me that out of the 1.7 million customers we have, they couldn’t find one to go and interview that said ‘I hate these guys’? That they are a scam and did not provide the service they were supposed to? You are kidding me, right? You know they wanted to find that person who’d say we are bad and evil.
All you ever hear in any of these stories is that [our advertising] could have been misunderstood. OK, then where did we do it? Then show me the evidence that we did it? I didn’t break the law by giving out my Social Security number, but [the FTC] felt like it could have motivated other people to do it. I didn’t see anybody else using a bullhorn or driving around a billboard truck giving out their Social Security number.
But hasn’t LifeLock claimed that its service protects consumers from ID theft from “ever happening” to them, guaranteed?
Just because we say protect, we aren’t saying prevent. We have always provided two layers of protection – proactive and resolution – [which is] our service guarantee to help fix problems if they were to arise. This has been our stance since the beginning, and our many members feel the peace of mind that comes from the service guarantee is as valuable as anything we offer.
In retrospect, was it a good idea giving out your Social Security number?
Yes, it was. I don’t regret it. We made people talk about it and that made them either choose our service or take other action and that’s what we were looking for. We are proudly protecting 1.7 million people. They are loyal and we have great retention because they see great value in us even with all these general claims that are being made about us.
You talked about how LifeLock has forced credit bureaus to improve their services. How’s that?
If you look at some of the new products offerings, instead of it just being a credit report from Experian they have had to up it to a free credit score. They have had to go offer incremental services. They had to go out and start doing more public record searches and be more proactive about looking for solutions. TransUnion has come out with Zendough, which is again not just about them selling you TransUnion profiles about you. They actually have had to go out and start aggregating from other places. They’ve had to elevate their game some, so if you become a victim, someone is truly there to help you. Now they’ve got a long way to go, but they would not have done any of this on their own.
What’s your response to critics who say that a lot of what LifeLock does can be done for free by consumers themselves?
I tell them, I want you guys to keep focusing on the past and we’ll continue to blow by you like we have already done. To any consumer, I welcome you to come and look under the covers. Come check out LifeLock for what we are and the service we provide. We will gladly compare ourselves to any service out there both on the front line of defense and on the back end. In a split second [consumers] will find that they can’t do this for free by themselves.
The official Twitter app for the iPhone looks and feels like the Tweetie app I loved, albeit with a few tweaks.
Harry McCracken
A little over a month ago, Twitter acquired Tweetie. Which was not only the best Twitter client for iPhones, but maybe the best way to use Twitter, period-and an exceptionally impressive piece of software, period. The company said that Tweetie would be relaunched as Twitter for iPhone-and the first (free) version under that name is now available in Apple’s App Store. It’s not just a moniker switcheroo: Tweetie’s last version was Tweetie 2.0, and this is Twitter for iPhone 3.0.
Twitter cofounder Biz Stone’s blog post on the news made me slightly antsy. He doesn’t even mention Tweetie-as if this were a brand-new app-and spends most of his wordage emphasizing that you don’t even need to have a Twitter account to use Twitter for iPhone, and can sign up for one within the app. I was concerned that the wonderfully powerful Tweetie might have gotten dumbed down.
Based on a few minutes with the new version, it doesn’t look like there was anything to worry about. Tweetie for iPhone does indeed try to welcome Twitter newbies-which I can’t complain about, since one of Twitter’s major problems from the get go has been how difficult it is to figure out. But it feels like the Tweetie I love, with some tweaks. (One I noticed: There’s one search field for tweets and users.)
Next question: When will Twitter announce and ship Twitter for iPad?
On Wednesday Sprint released a new version of Android OS 2.1 with several new features that improve functionality. The upgrade, however, comes with this caveat posted on Sprint’s download page:
WARNING: Installing this software will erase your current user data. Please see instructions below for details.
Installing the update will “delete all information from your device,” including “contacts that have not been synced to an email account, text messages that have not been forwarded, saved voicemail messages older than 5 days, voicemails older than 20 days that have not been listened to, and call history. The calendar and email settings will also revert back to factory defaults.”
On the upside, the upgrade from the Android 1.5 OS renders a staggering number of features. They include support for Google’s navigation service, which offers spoken, turn-by-turn directions without having to pay a monthly service charge. It also offers much greater support for speech-to-text, letting users speak in order to enter text into an application.
Users will also have support for Microsoft Exchange, Adobe Flash support, improved keyboard layout, enhanced Google maps and the ability to search SMS messages, among other additions.
Besides running the Android OS, the Hero uses the HTC Sense user interface, which enhances Google’s standard UI. The upgrade to the smartphone’s system software will include a new version of Sense, which will add a new feature called FriendStream, which brings together posts made to social networking sites like Facebook, Twitter and Flickr.
Some new widgets will also be included such as an agenda view for the calendar and another that can display multiple emails.
As for the data deletions, a single sign-on to Google will bring back all of the contacts. Files stored on the microSD memory card, such as pictures, music and videos will not be affected. And data stored remotely — such as on Google Calendar or a Microsoft Exchange Server — won’t be affected.
The HTC Hero was introduced in late 2009 and is reviewed here. It has a 3.2-inch capacitive touch screen, but it won’t have the same Android user interface that comes with devices like the T-Mobile G1 or the upcoming myTouch 3G. HTC has layered its own UI, called Sense, on top of the Google-backed Android in order to add gesture controls, widget support, and quick-launch icons for things like e-mail, Facebook, Twitter, or other Web-based applications.
If the browser is the new operating system, where will we buy software for it to run, and content for it to display? Google thinks it has found the answer, with its Chrome Web Store, announced at its own Google I/O conference in San Francisco on Wednesday.
Much in the same way you can buy apps for your iPhone, Android, or other smartphone, you’ll soon be able to buy web apps for your browser. This not only gives app developers a new avenue for selling their software, but will allow content industries such as news publications, video producers, and musicians to sell web content, having notoriously struggled to make their content pay online in the absence of such a store.
For instance, a record label will be able to sell an album that displays extra content within a web browser as music plays, and publishers already creating paid mobile apps will be able to apply the same approach to the web, perhaps charging $5 per month for premium access to their publications.
And, should they choose, they will be able to offer these web apps for free, as well. Confusion is quickly spreading about whether these apps will only run in Google’s Chrome browser — despite the fact that Google clearly states near the top of the website for the Chrome Web Store that any modern browser will be able to run the apps.
“Because web apps listed in the Chrome Web Store are regular web applications, built with standard web tools, they can be used by anyone using a modern browser that supports these web technologies,” reads the first entry in Google’s FAQ about the store. “Web apps listed in the Chrome Web Store are regular web applications that are built with standard web tools and technologies,” reiterates the second entry. “The same web applications will run in other modern browsers that support these technologies.”
Still, that didn’t stop the Wall Street Journal, which runs its own, single-product web store consisting of its own full-length articles, from sowing considerable doubt about whether the apps would run in any browser, which we don’t feel the need to repeat here for fear of perpetuating that confusion.
The two areas in which Google’s Chrome browser might potentially have an advantage over other browsers are shortcuts (not a big deal) and that “installed web apps can also request advanced HTML5 permissions” — a feature that should be duplicatable by other browsers, should their developers decide to add it, because HTML5 is an open standard.
“The web is the most important platform of our generation,” said Google vice president of engineering Vic Gundotra at Wednesday’s keynote. “Because it’s a platform controlled by none of us, it’s the only platform truly controlled by all of us.”
The Google Web Store is slated to launch later this year. For now, the idea is still in the early stages, and only developers with a special version of the Chrome browser for Windows can install these web apps. Eventually, these apps will run in any browser with support for HTML5 and other modern, open technologies, offering a lifeline to content industries that have otherwise struggled to make web content pay.
The big losers in all of this: Microsoft and Apple, whose desktop operating systems just got a lot less interesting. And that’s not all — the iTunes app store, which only sells software that runs on Apple products, now looks even more like a closed-off, walled garden.
Ginny Mies
I got an advance look at Google’s latest treat for Android phones, Android 2.2 (more deliciously known as Froyo) on the Nexus One. Announced this morning at Google I/O in San Franisco, the update will initially be available to Motorola Droid and Nexus One owners in June. Android users will definitely be happy with this update, which delivers faster performance, tethering/mobile hotspot and of course, Flash support.
Flash Player 10.1: Great for Watching Video
At last, full Flash support has finally arrived on Android. Overall, the whole experience is quite good, but I encountered a couple of issues in my hands-on. Video playback looked excellent on the Nexus One’s screen. I watched a couple of trailers on the Warner Brothers’ site and was impressed with how smooth playback the was.
Flash support brings some big gaming potential to the Android platform. I tested the South Park Studios’ make-your-own avatar feature and was amazed with how speedy the game was. Other games, like a baseball game on Kongregate ran smoothly as well. Farmville fans will also be delighted to learn that the ridiculously-addictive social networking game is Flash-based as well. Now you’ll never get away from your farm.
Of course, not all sites were so fast. While the kid’s educational site Ecoda Zoo looked gorgeous on the Nexus One, it moved painfully slow. I tried playing a couple of beloved Flash games that aren’t optimized for mobile and was disappointed that I couldn’t play some of them without a keyboard. For example, with Dino Run, I had to press the “space” bar to do a certain action, but I couldn’t access the touch keyboard (the keyboard only comes up when you’re in a typing field).
Interestingly enough, there’s a shortcut on one of the homescreens to a page with recommended Flash-enabled sites and games including South Park Studios, BBC, Sony Pictures, Armor Games and more. TechCrunch dug up the lists for both the Nexus One and the Droid and pointed out that the two are different. In fact, the list for the Droid is much shorter than the Nexus One’s.
Missing from all of this Flash action, of course, is Hulu. I was really disappointed when I tried-and ultimately failed-to watch an episode of “30 Rock” on the Nexus One. According to Adobe, Hulu does not own distribution rights for their content on mobile devices and therefore cannot stream video to smartphones. With no Hulu on the iPad and no Hulu on your Android phone, isn’t time for Hulu to develop an app? Let’s hope so.
Android 2.2: Faster Performance, Wi-Fi HotSpot and Tethering
While Flash Player is clearly the biggest update, there are definitely a few gems in the update. I did some side-by-side 
tests with a Nexus One running 2.1 and right off the bat, I noticed how much faster 2.2 is. Native apps launched quicker and scrolling through Web pages felt smoother on my 2.2 Nexus One.
I’m not sure how the carriers will handle this, but I was able to turn my T-Mobile Nexus One into a mobile hotspot via T-Mobile without any issue. Tethering also worked without any issue with T-Mobile.
One of the biggest weaknesses with Android was the inability to download apps to your microSD card; you had to resort to using your precious internal memory. Now, with the 2.2 update, you can store your apps on a microSD card.
Finally, there are also a few subtle cosmetic tweaks in the update. On the homescreen, there are three permanent shortcuts to the dialer app, the app menu and the browser. Éclair (2.0/2.1) only has a shortcut to the Menu app. Other than that, 2.2 looks pretty similar to 2.1.
The next treat for Android fans is Gingerbread, coming in Q4 of 2010. What do you want to see in the next version of Android? Leave your answer in the comments below.
ABOUT
Leading The Way In e Commerce Solutions
RECENT POSTS
| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| « Aug | ||||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ||
| 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 |
| 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 |
| 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | |||