The Mad Penguin

NY Times: 2 Chinese Universities Tied to Google Hacking

noreply@blogger.com (Mike Bear) — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 18:13:00 +0000

AN FRANCISCO — A series of online attacks on Google and dozens of other American corporations have been traced to computers at two educational institutions in China, including one with close ties to the Chinese military, say people involved in the investigation.

James C. Mulvenon said the Chinese government often used volunteer “patriotic hackers” to support its policies.

They also said the attacks, aimed at stealing trade secrets and computer codes and capturing e-mail of Chinese human rights activists, may have begun as early as April, months earlier than previously believed. Google announced on Jan. 12 that it and other companies had been subjected to sophisticated attacks that probably came from China.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/19/technology/19china.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

Google Plans Assault on Facebook

noreply@blogger.com (Mike Bear) — Tue, 09 Feb 2010 16:51:00 +0000

Google is set to make a fresh attempt to gain a stronger foothold in the booming social networking business on Tuesday as it seeks to counter the growing threat that Facebook poses to some of its core services.The search company is preparing to announce new features for Gmail that wouldextend the capabilities of the internet-based e-mail service to mirror some aspects of the fast-growing social networking site, according to a person familiar with its plans.

See here for more: http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/9f96e616-150e-11df-ad58-00144feab49a.html

Microsoft to Patch 17 Year Old Bug

noreply@blogger.com (Mike Bear) — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 05:45:00 +0000

A 17-year-old bug in Windows will be patched by Microsoft in its latest security update.

The February update for Windows will close the loophole that dates from the time of the DOS operating system.

First appearing in Windows NT 3.1, the vulnerability has been carried over into almost every version of Windows that has appeared since.

See here for more: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8499859.stm

WP: Google to Enlist NSA to Help It ward Off Cyberattacks

noreply@blogger.com (Mike Bear) — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 16:42:00 +0000

The world's largest Internet search company and the world's most powerful electronic surveillance organization are teaming up in the name of cybersecurity.

Under an agreement that is still being finalized, the National Security Agency would help Google analyze a major corporate espionage attack that the firm said originated in China and targeted its computer networks, according to cybersecurity experts familiar with the matter. The objective is to better defend Google -- and its users -- from future attack.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/03/AR2010020304057_pf.html

It's been 10 years: Why won't people pay for privacy?

noreply@blogger.com (Mike Bear) — Thu, 28 Jan 2010 20:32:00 +0000

An Internet start-up wants to sell you the ability to protect your privacy, allowing you to create different online identities for different purposes and cloak your true self from prying eyes.

Early press coverage has been uniformly positive. CNN.com's review says "Total digital privacy may be on the horizon." The San Francisco Chronicle's article is titled "Online disguises from prying eyes." To BusinessWeek, it's a "A big boost for Net privacy."

"Think about how much business is predicated on the flow of personal information!" one of the founders predicts. "If you need to add privacy as a foundation under all of that, what is that industry worth? It's huge. Billions and billions and billions."

The year was 2000, and the company was named Zero Knowledge Systems. Even by the standards of that era, it spent staggering sums of money with virtually no sales: ZKS brought in only $400,000 in 2001 in license revenue from its flagship Freedom software, while losing $24 million a year, according to documents filed for its initial public offering. The IPO was canceled two months later, and ZKS abandoned the idea of selling privacy for a profit; under a new name it sells IT services to Internet service providers.

See below for more:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10443575-38.html?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-20

NY Times: Web Users Still Using 'Password' as Their Password

noreply@blogger.com (Mike Bear) — Thu, 21 Jan 2010 17:49:00 +0000

[And, people have the nerve to complain about being 'hacked'? ]

According to a new analysis, one out of five Web users still decides to leave the digital equivalent of a key under the doormat: they choose a simple, easily guessed password like “abc123,” “iloveyou” or even “password” to protect their data.

See here for more: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/21/technology/21password.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

Google Wave FAQ

noreply@blogger.com (Mike Bear) — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 20:10:00 +0000

It appears that Google's latest by-invitation-only Beta Geek Gadget, Google Wave, is getting off to a slow start, even amongst the geekiest geeks.....which is not a good sign.

Why Should I Use Google Wave? FAQ:

http://lifehacker.com/5446406/frequently-asked-questions-about-google-wave?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+lifehacker/full+(Lifehacker)&utm_content=My+Yahoo

Chrome OS

noreply@blogger.com (Mike Bear) — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 16:31:00 +0000

How to Run Chrome OS [Such As It Is] on a Virtual Machine in Win 7

noreply@blogger.com (Mike Bear) — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 16:26:00 +0000

OK, so it's been a while since I've posted anything here--my apologies--so, here's a nice little tidbit I was able to test out myself last night: how to run the new Chrome OS [such as it is--it's bascially a glorified browser with a couple online programs, not all of which even work] in a Virtual Machine in Windows 7.

It's really two, fairly easy steps:

1. Install the Virtual Machine, called Virtual Box here, by Sun Microsystems

2. Follow the instructions for downloading and installing Chrome OS. The same procedure, by the way, can be used to run almost any OS: Linux/BSD Unix, etc.

Click below for more:

http://www.howtogeek.com/howto/6770/how-to-run-chrome-os-in-virtualbox/

noreply@blogger.com (Mike Bear) — Tue, 24 Feb 2009 21:20:00 +0000

Umm...Not Quite So Fast: PC TV Works Again in Win 7...

noreply@blogger.com (Mike Bear) — Tue, 24 Feb 2009 21:10:00 +0000

So, just when I thought I'd be able to return this blog to its original format, namely, Linux and BSD OSs, my PC TV suddenly started working again in Win 7.

This really baffles me: because I thought I had read somewhere that MS had disabled the TV Card function in the beta version, for their own obscure reasons.

But, now, when I reboot into Win 7, it works again! WTF?

Oh, well....I'm still planning on phasing out blog entries about Win 7, since it's on the verge of coming out in the final version soon, and no further beta versions are planned.

So: stay tuned: a review of Ubuntu 8.10, Intrepid Ibex, coming soon!

PS: I'm also going to be dismantling some of the 'Windows Beta' RSS feeds and sidebars here, as well.

End of Windows Beta for Me....

noreply@blogger.com (Mike Bear) — Sun, 18 Jan 2009 18:26:00 +0000

OK, so after all the hype about Windows Beta on this blog, while I have it running alongside Vista now and am, overall, quite happy with it, I won't be using it much:

--Microsoft has disabled the TV Card drivers in the Beta version, so it no longer runs my Windows Media Center TV program, which I use extensively, which means I am now more or less relegated to Vista.

I say 'no longer runs' because, at first I thought the TV Card Drivers had been disabled only in the final Beta, so I rolled back to Build 6596, because the TV always seemed to work in that version.

No longer. The TV function worked once, then quit.

I tried reinstalling the drivers--to no avail. It still won't run TV in the Media Center.

You can't even run the TV from the ATI Catalyst Program either, because once installed, the .exe
simply disappears and you can't locate it to run the TV.........so, I give up.

It was a noble experiment, but it looks like I'm stuck with Vista until MS allows Windows 7 to run with TV cards, most likely in the RTM in June. Bleh.

The Latest Leak of Windows 7 Beta: Ars Technica

noreply@blogger.com (Mike Bear) — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 23:02:00 +0000

Dec. 29:

This past weekend, Windows 7 build 7000 leaked to torrent sites. It's not the first build of Windows 7 to leak, but it definitely is the most important one so far. You see, the first 7xxx build marks the entrance of Windows 7 into beta phase (6xxx builds were pre-beta builds).

http://arstechnica.com/journals/microsoft.ars/2008/12/29/the-windows-7-build-7000-leak-and-microsofts-reaction

Major Complaint About Website Log Ins: "Your PW OR Your User Name Are Incorrect"......WHICH Is It????

noreply@blogger.com (Mike Bear) — Thu, 25 Dec 2008 15:41:00 +0000

Sorry to start off Christmas Day with a complaint [Merry Christmas and Happy Hannukah!], but the whole business of web page log ins has gotten waaaay out of hand.

I understand that spammers are primarily to blame for this but, nonetheless, the whole situation with websites which require setting up an account to log in has really become a pain in the ass, for several reasons:

--you must set up a User Account with a Password AND a User Name AND: enter 'security information' such as your pet's name and fill in what's called a 'Captcha' image of nonesense letters, like: LNYEW to prove you're not a spammer.

--OK: as I just said above, I understand the need to foil spammers, but:

--after about the 27th webite, you realize that you're never going to remember all those damn passwords, and, against your better judgment, you start using the same PWs and UNs over and over, simply because no one can remember them all!

--now, here is my MAJOR GRIPE: so, you've got your 27 favorite websites, all of which require you to log in with a User Name and PW, which you're not sure you can remember.

--you log in and you get an error message which says: "Your Password or Username are incorrect, please try again."

Your Password OR your Username?

Why can't they tell you which one?

Let's say you have NOT been using the same UN and PW from site to site.

--Don't they realize how many permutations there could be between the possible number of UN combinations and the possible number of PW combinations in your head?

WEBSITES NEED TO TELL YOU WHICH ARE INCORRECT: THE PASSWORD OR THE USERNAME, BECAUSE OTHERWISE, YOU'LL BE THERE ALL DAY, TRYING ALL THE VARIOUS COMBINATIONS OF THE TWO.....

AND: many website log ins do NOT remind you that your User Name is your email address, so you sit there entering all these fancy UN combinations, not realizing it was your EMAIL ADDRESS the WHOLE time!

And, guess what else?

Some websites LOCK YOU OUT AFTER 5 ATTEMPTS!

I cannot believe that I am the only person who has run into this irritating situation........

Lemme me know if you've experienced something similar.

Thanks,

More Info on Windows Beta 7 Testing [Don't Get Your Hopes Up]

noreply@blogger.com (Mike Bear) — Wed, 17 Dec 2008 19:07:00 +0000

Here's some more information on becoming a beta tester for Windows 7.

Basically, don't get your hopes up.

While there are many web links, like the one below, basically, unless you know a Windows Developer or have actually been a beta tester for Microsoft before, your chances of being selected are slim to none--which really begs the question of how you become one--answer: have been one before. Not much help, right?

Microsoft has a couple sites which sort of get your hope up with links like: "Click here to sign up to become a beta tester for Windows 7, " but then you click on them and see something like:

"Thank you for your interest in becoming a Window Beta Tester, but the program is closed at this time [meaning: we've selected all the same people we hired last time and you weren't one of them then and you won't be one of them now] and we are not taking any more applicants."

Your other option [the really expensive one ] is to pay $300-$600 for a MSDN developer's membership, and maybe, just maybe, they'll send you some beta DVDs as part of your membership.

But, anyway, here's a link to artificially get your hopes up:

http://community.winsupersite.com/blogs/paul/archive/2008/12/16/windows-7-beta-testing.aspx

An even more depressing link is this one, which I also gave on the right side of this blog earlier last month:

https://connect.microsoft.com/Connect/feedback/ViewFeedback.aspx?FeedbackID=371972

from the Microsoft Connect web site, devoted exclusively, near as I can tell, to getting your hopes up that you may have a slim chance [which you don't] that mentions the Beta Testing Program, says it's closed and then shows all the 1,234,9546 other would-be beta testers' fawning 'OH, PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, LET ME BECOME A BETA TESTER!' begging pleas.

You can almost hear Microsoft saying "HA, HA! YOU CAN'T!" followed by evil cackling in the background....

I hate to say it, but, ACTUALLY, you're best bet is to type in 'download Windows 7 Beta' into Google and go download one of the many leaked beta versions floating around, illegally, of course, and at your own risk.

But, I would NEVER recommend such a thing. :)

noreply@blogger.com (Mike Bear) — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 20:30:00 +0000

Mac Rumors: 'Snow Leopard' Due in 1st Q '09

noreply@blogger.com (Mike Bear) — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 20:24:00 +0000

Mmmm.......very, very interestink! [Germanic accent here]:

http://www.macrumors.com/2008/11/18/mac-os-x-snow-leopard-10-6-due-in-q1-2009/

--Click on Apple's Director of Engineering of Unix Technologies Jordan Hubbard's .pdf Slide Show towards the end of the first paragraph.

Defunct 'Open Darwin Project' Has Become 'Pure Darwin'

noreply@blogger.com (Mike Bear) — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 23:51:00 +0000

On July 25, 2006, the OpenDarwin team announced that the project was shutting down, as they felt OpenDarwin had "become a mere hosting facility for Mac OS X related projects," and that the efforts to create a standalone Darwin operating system had failed. They also state: "Availability of sources, interaction with Apple representatives, difficulty building and tracking sources, and a lack of interest from the community have all contributed to this."[12] The last stable release was version 7.2.1, released on July 16, 2004.[13]

PureDarwin

In 2007, the PureDarwin project was launched to continue where OpenDarwin left off, and is currently working to produce a release based on Darwin 9.

Windows 7 Due in Mid-2009

noreply@blogger.com (Mike Bear) — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 18:53:00 +0000

--Sources close to Microsoft say the new flagship OS will be due out sometime in mid-2009.

Horrors! Windows 7 Reviews Here--OFF With His Head!

noreply@blogger.com (Mike Bear) — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 22:51:00 +0000

OK, you may be asking yourself: "Self: why on earth does he have RSS Feeds for Windows 7 on this site, which is devoted mainly to Linux/Unix?"

Well...........the reasoning is as follows:

1. I was able to snag a copy of Windows 7 Pre-Beta [final version not scheduled until 2010] and am now dual booting with Vista on my main Desktop machine and I want to see how others are experiencing it.

2. It is being billed as 'the OS that Vista was supposed to be.' Now, THAT gives me hope!

3. With some feature perhaps borrowed from Apple's Mac OS X, it certainly has my curiosity piqued....so, stay tune for reviews!

4. I'm also in the process of tracking the various Betas of Window 7 and these RSS feeds profess to be from 'Microsoft Insiders,' and are the best way to stay on top of the various iterations of Windows 7.

--Once we get to Betas 1 and 2, I'll be able to discontinue these feeds. :)

Excellent Review of Windows 7 Below:

noreply@blogger.com (Mike Bear) — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 22:49:00 +0000

It’s that time again. Has it been that long? Windows Vista has been Microsoft’s most public, most controversial yet most important release in the Company’s history. Consumer reception of the operating system released world-wide in January of 2007 was one of hesitance, let’s wait and see, and for those who adopted early, unforgiving. A lot of things with Windows Vista were not coordinated well, from communication, its system requirements, Industry Partnership and what value does it really offer to a Windows XP user which has dominated the market for nearly 7 years. The Company’s (OEMs) who were supposed to represent Windows Vista on their systems did so poorly initially. A lot of debate has started over this, which includes Microsoft’s alleged deal with Intel to support a particular integrated graphics chipset, the Windows Vista Capable branding and the perception that Vista was never ready out the gate. I would describe myself as being at the centre of most of these issues.

For one, OEMs did a bad job of communicating Vista by sending systems out of their factories without properly testing real world scenario’s of what the average consumer will be doing with such a system leaving them with just the bare minimum. Second, Microsoft never gave clear understanding of what it really takes to run the OS acceptably. The coordination was pretty much a disaster in the early months of its release. Third, competitors such as Apple Inc. took the chance and ran with this hit ‘em when their down strategy and over the past couple of years defined Microsoft and Windows into a Company that cannot meet consumer expectations. Although it was mostly inaccurate when Vista was setup on systems that should have been released in January 2007, the damage in some ways seems to have already been done; regardless the OS has garnered over 180 million strong support on systems worldwide. The first Service Pack was released in 2008 improving general performance and common task like file copy/move and boot time and Microsoft is expected to release the second Service Pack some time in 2009. There is still this thing of perception though, but Microsoft known to not rest on their laurels, used this experience as a good dose of ‘we need to do extremely better’.

And so it is with this new venture called Windows 7 we arrive at the opportunity to fix the past and right the future.

See here for rest of Windows 7 Preview: http://activewin.com/reviews/previews/windows7/

noreply@blogger.com (Mike Bear) — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 19:24:00 +0000

noreply@blogger.com (Mike Bear) — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 19:23:00 +0000

Going Insanely Mac: OS X Leopard on My AMD Laptop...

noreply@blogger.com (Mike Bear) — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 18:06:00 +0000

I don't know what got into me lately, because I tried a 'hacked' version of Tiger about 6 months ago and wasn't that wild about it [too hard to find programs and files...] and so, I uninstalled it and went back to other forms of BSD, like PCBSD and Open Solaris.

But, for some reason, this last weekend, when I found out there was a new 'hacked' version of Leopard available for AMD, I decided to try it again.

I'm glad I did.

I have gone over to The Dark Side, Luke. :)

It's a miracle it ever got installed: downloading and installing these 'hacked' version of the Mac OS for a non-Mac computer is an extremely esoteric practice, even for those with prior experience in Linux and BSD systems. To wit, here is what you have to do [warning: be prepared for a lot of frustration and failure--this is not for the faint-of-heart!]:

1. First you have to 'find' a download source for the .iso image.........this usually involves trawling numerous Mac forums and/or doing numerous Google searches for it. There are 2-3 main .iso images out there: BrazilMac's, Kalyway and iATKOS.

Clue: don't log onto a Mac Forum and 'beg' for a download source: for one thing, most forums forbid giving out such information and, secondly, you'll only annoy the very people you may be asking f or help from down the road.

Hint: in your google search, type in anyone of the names above, along 'OS X' and your computer chip: AMD/Intel, etc.

2. Once you've found the right .iso image [it has to be specific to your CPU: Intel/AMD, etc.], then you have to master the fine art of downloading from a bit torrent site, which 'seeds' bits and pieces of the code from all over the Internet and 'funnels' them all into one download to your PC. This process can take up to 48 hrs for 3 + gigs of software. So, your must have a 'Bit Torrent Client' to do this. You can download 'Bittorrent' for Windows for this...and these 'bittorrent clients' take a little bit of practice [and a lot of patience] to use correctly.

Two tips here:

1) make sure you find out where your client is putting the bits and pieces of your .iso image, or you'll spend too much time trying to located them on your PC.

Suggestion: either make a note of the default download location in your 'bittorrent client' or create a special folder on your Desktop for your .iso downloads.

2) a bit of 'bittorrent' protocol I picked up doing this: once your image is downloaded, let it 'sit' for a couple of days on your computer, with your computer running [not off]; this allows it to do what's called 'seed' and make those same torrent bits available to others on the Internet, who will get them from your PC: this is common courtesy when doing so-called 'peer-to-peer' [P2P] sharing. You can still burn your .iso image while doing this.

The rationale being: they did this for you, which is how you got your image in the first place, so it's only common courtesy to return the favor.

3. So, once you have located a 'bit torrent download site' and have got your .iso image downloading, you then, sit back and wait 24-48 hrs. for it to download. [I almost didn't realize my download had finished, it took so long, I just totally forgot about it: and it was only when I got a 'pop up' reminding me it was downloaded, that I even remembered to resume the 'hunt' for Leopard. If your client is downloading at 60 kb/sec., you're going to be waiting an awful long time for 4 gigs. to come through. I've noticed that the 'seeding' process in these clients is either extremely slow or extremely fast.....rarely in the middle. Sometimes, if you just wait long enough, the download process will 'pick up speed' after about 8 hrs. If you leave it running overnight, sometimes you will be surprised to see it's completed in the morning.

4. And, sometimes, it's downloaded in a compressed format, such as .rar, so that means you have to locate a RAR 'uncompressing program' in order to uncompress the files, once they are downloaded. Look and see if they have a .rar file name. If they do, you have to uncompress them before you burn them to a DVD. Note: Win Zip will not uncompress RAR files.

5. Now, once your 'bit torrent' files have been downloaded and decompressed, you have to burn them to a DVD.

6. Warning: you must have a DVD burning programs which will burn .iso images. If you try and burn an .iso image as an ordinary 'file,' the resulting DVD will not boot, and is therefore useless to you.

7. Whatever DVD program you use, you then have to locate your downloaded files and burn it as an '.iso image.' Look for a settting in your DVD Burning Program that says 'Burn Image.'

No other setting will work. Trust me on this: I'm speaking from tortuous experience!

8. Once this is done, you're on the home stretch. If you have a 'checksum' program which checks the integrity of the downloaded files or .iso image, I suggest using it. It will save you grief from corrupted files DVD later on. [Actually, the beginning of the Apple Mac OS Installation Program will offer to check your 'media' [the DVD] for errors and I suggest doing this the first time. That will tell you if the files you put on your DVD are corrupted and save you a lot of wasted time.

[If it does come back as 'corrupted,' then, I suggest deleting that .iso image [it's no good] and re-downloading another one and burning it.]

9. Now, insert the DVD, reboot your machine and pray. By that I mean, if everything works, you're good to go; if not, you'd better be a BSD/Mac Guru to try and figure out what went wrong--and, I am no guru.

10. If it won't boot into the the Mac installation program, the impression I get from my research on the subject is that it's mostly like due to one of two factors:

1) either you didn't get the right version for your particular chip, ie: Intel/AMD, etc., or:

2) you did, but the .iso image didn't have the right 'patches' for your machine.

11. This means you have to go back to the drawing board and locate the .iso image with the right 'patches ' for your chip. [Some of the 'bit torrent downloads' come with 'patches' you can add to your DVD image before burning it.]

12. If it does boot into the Mac Installation screen, then you're good to go: simply sit back and let it install. I don't recommend trying a 'dual boot' setup the first time you do this, simply because of the attendant nightmarish complications this can bring about. Use the 'Use Entire Disk' set up, instead. Dual booting in this type of situation is just asking for trouble in an already complicated setup. You have enough on your hands with this.

13. The OS X Installation comes with a good 'Disk Repair' progam [at the top] you can use to repair disks/partitions even during installation.

14. Once the installation completes, one reboot is required, and as with many OSes, they never tell you whether to remove the disk or not during the reboot. Sometimes leaving it in causes the installation program to re-start all over again. I would recommend removing the installation disk during reboot. This forces the system to try and boot from your newly installed MBR.

15. ONE IMPORTANT CAVEAT HERE: once your 'hacked Mac' OS is installed, DO NOT attempt to download and install any Mac OS System Upgrades! YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED!

The reason? Like Bill Gates, Steve Jobs has instructed his software developers to code the OS Upgrades to check for legal licenses in the original installation [yours], and if none are found during the upgrade, the upgrade will render your installation unbootable.

Other than that, I can't think of anything to add.

The whole business of downloading and installing 'hacked Mac' OSes is, as I've mentioned above, extremely esoteric and most of us non-Mac gurus are illequipped to handle anything short of 100% success in these type of installations.

Good luck if you try this: I highly recommend checking the two following sites out BEFORE you attempt any of these installations [they will become your Bible]:

http://wiki.osx86project.org/wiki/index.php/Main_Page

http://www.insanelymac.om

Oh, and one final caveat: downloading these 'hacked' versions of Apple software is almost certainly not legal [therefore I hereby condemn the practice] :) and would if nothing else, annoy Steve Jobs no end--and, you wouldn't want to do that, would you?

--As they say on these 'hacked Mac' websites: if you really want a Mac, buy one. :)

Microsoft Basic 'Easter Egg'

noreply@blogger.com (Mike Bear) — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 19:33:00 +0000