WEKLY ONLINE

Family lost for 6 days found alive in Oregon forest

2012-02-05T03:40:00.002-10:00

PORTLAND, Ore. – A family of three huddled on the edge of an old-growth Oregon forest for six days, lost and cold, unable to signal search helicopters flying low and slow overhead.

Without food, water or even warm clothing, Belinda and Daniel Conne, along with their 25-year-old son, Michael, survived by drinking water from streams and taking shelter in a hollowed-out tree.

On Saturday, they managed to crawl to a clearing, where a search helicopter spotted them several miles outside the community of Gold Beach, roughly 330 miles south-southwest of Portland.

"It's a miracle, really," Curry County Sheriff John Bishop said.

The three were airlifted to a Gold Beach hospital, where Bishop spoke with them at an emergency room. He said the Connes told him they could see search helicopters just a few hundred feet above them while they were lost but had nothing to signal them with through the thick, coastal forest vegetation.

Bishop said Daniel Conne suffered a back injury, Belinda Conne had hypothermia, and their son had a sprained foot and minor frostbite. All three also were dehydrated and hungry.

"They just got turned around," Bishop said. "They sought some shelter in a hollowed-out tree and basically they stayed in the same place. But it was heavy vegetation where they were."

Bishop said the three were "remarkably in pretty good shape," given the amount of time they spent outside. He said they likely could have survived for two or three more days in the area, where fresh water is plentiful but food is scarce. The weather was mostly clear, with temperatures in the 40s and 50s.

Bishop said the family was spotted by Jackson County Commissioner John Raschor, who was searching for them in his own helicopter with Curry County Sheriff's Lt. John Ward.

Raschor is the same pilot who found a San Francisco family lost in a snowstorm in 2006 just 35 miles from where he found the Connes. In 2006, Raschor flew Kati Kim and her two young daughters to safety after spotting them near their car. James Kim died of hypothermia trying to hike out for help.

After being spotted by Raschor and Ward, the Connes were transported by a U.S. Coast Guard helicopter to Curry General Hospital in Gold Beach. A nursing supervisor said Saturday afternoon the three were in a doctor's care and were unavailable for comment.

At the emergency room, Bishop said the Connes were "very thankful for the rescue" and were able to eat solid food.

People frequently get lost or stranded in the area where the Connes went missing -- rugged country in the Klamath Mountains riddled with a maze of logging roads.

The ordeal began last Sunday when the three went out looking for hedgehog mushrooms, an orange-topped fungus prized by mushroom hunters for its sweet and nutty flavor. The three had been living in a trailer at a campsite after leaving Oklahoma for Oregon last summer.

Dusk fell during the family's hunt. They started to return to their Jeep but couldn't agree on directions.

"Pretty quickly, they found they were lost," Bishop said.

The family found a forest road next to a river bank and huddled together with their dog, a pit bull-terrier mix.

Search parties were dispatched Tuesday, when their campsite manager realized the Connes hadn't returned. The Jeep was found on a logging road Wednesday, along with two small dogs and the family's jackets.

Searchers found a trail and a few hopeful clues along the way: a can of Pepsi, mushroom-picking buckets, a few pieces of clothing.

Bishop said Daniel Conne told him he had a sinking feeling every day the family wasn't found. Daniel Conne would watch the search helicopter pass but was unable to get their attention.

"They said, `You were right above us,"' Bishop said.

When the family was finally found Saturday, they were only 200 yards from the nearest group of searchers.

The search had focused on a 4-square-mile area. Bishop said the family was in the search area but likely kept moving, making the search for them more difficult.

"We were actually right near them all three days" of the search, Bishop said. In the area's canyons, "you think people can hear you, but they can't."

The search involved three Southern Oregon counties and one California county.

When dawn broke Saturday, Bishop said searchers entered the woods without much hope.

"We were sort of getting ready to go into body-recovery mode," he said.

Joe Dykes, who works at the Huntley Park campsite where the family was staying, said Belinda and Daniel Conne arrived at the campsite in July after moving there from Oklahoma. Their son arrived later.

Belinda Conne works as a housekeeper at the Jot's Resort, where motel owner Virginia McKinney said the Connes were preparing to rent a home in Gold Beach before the disappearance.

McKinney said Belinda told her she always wanted to live on the Oregon coast, and finally left Oklahoma last year with the intention of settling down

Sean Kingston - Party All Night (Sleep All Day) (Official Music Video)

2012-02-02T13:11:00.000-10:00

Brad Pitt’s Secret to Waking Up the Kids

2012-02-02T13:07:00.005-10:00

Every parent has his or her tricks -- things that must be done to keep the house running. Brad Pitt is no different. In a recent interview with CBS This Morning, the Oscar-nominated actor ("Moneyball") revealed that he sometimes has to rely on a certain carbonated beverage to get his kids moving in the morning.

omg from Yahoo!: Brad Pitt

"Listen, I admit there's times like, 'We gotta get up. Get up! Here's your shoes. Here's your shoes. Drink this Coke. Drink this Coca-Cola. Drink it all. Right now! Drink it! Drink it! Drink it!' Just so we could get 'em up and going," Pitt confessed.

Pitt was speaking about his chaotic life with six children. The kids, three biological with Angelina Jolie and three adopted from overseas, travel with their mom and dad everywhere. Pitt says that as the kids get older, they're becoming more aware that their parents aren't married.

omg from Yahoo!: Most Fashionable Celebrity Kids

"We're getting a lot of pressure from the kids," Pitt says. "It [marriage] means something to them. And they have questions when their friends parents are married and why is that." Pitt has gone on record as saying that he and Jolie don't plan to marry until all couples can do so legally. Whether the kids will push the couple toward the altar (like Shrek and Princess Fiona) remains to be seen.

'Fear Factor' contestants told by NBC to shut up about canceled episode they starred in

2012-02-02T13:04:00.001-10:00

Just when you thought reality television couldn’t get any lower … this happens.

Twins Brynne and Claire Odioso went on the current season of NBC’s popular stunt/dare game show “Fear Factor” and drank a big glass of donkey semen. But it’s not the act itself that the ladies are spewing about. It’s the fact that on Monday night the network pulled the episode – titled “Hee Haw! Hee Haw!” – and replaced it with a rerun after news of the jaw-dropping episode leaked and freaked people out.

“We are disappointed because we wanted to share the experience with our friends and family,” Brynne Odioso told Gawker.com, after calling into Tampa-based radio program The Cowhead Show and elaborating that it was the “hardest 15 minutes of (their) life.”

“If you vomited you would have to start over, I ended up just vomiting in my glass and drank that. The camera men were vomiting,” one of the twins said. “It smells. It’s so bitter, and it has a little hint of hay.”

But not only did the Odioso girls gag, it seems they have now been gag-ordered by NBC to keep their lips sealed about the incident. The twins told reporters that the network scolded them for “revealing too much” and reminded them they are bound by confidentiality agreements.

But according to a well-placed insider familiar with the show, chances are nothing will come of the controversy, and the hapless contestants may not have been the only ones to do the deed.

“I'm sure that the contracts caused the talent to agree to do anything and everything, including eat/drink things from animals. Typically you even accept the fact that you might die in the show and you release all liability,” said our source. “They eat bugs, rats, etc., all the time on ‘Fear Factor’ – and I know that the network tests all challenges before using them to make sure they're safe. So legally, NBC is very likely covered. I also know that they had the choice of drinking the semen or something else, so there was at least an option, although the other option sucked too.”

That option was reportedly donkey urine.

NBC did not respond to a request for comment, and one expert says the network isn't the one who come out looking bad in this: the twins do.

“It is outrageous, and exactly what the program is designed to be. When you agree to go on ‘Fear Factor,’ anything is possible and you clearly should expect the unexpected. So while most of us would think of drinking donkey semen as disgusting, you sign up for that when you sign on the dotted line,” said image and PR expert Glenn Selig. “People have become so desensitized to the lunacy of reality shows; it’s difficult to see the public being outraged with NBC over this. Actually, I would expect that the public will take the position that the twins knew what they were signing up for, and got exactly that.”

But they didn’t get the air time they had anticipated – and have been quick to defend their actions, telling TMZ they were “proud” of such an achievement, and would “probably” do it again.

Key Internet operator VeriSign hit by hackers

2012-02-02T11:12:00.002-10:00

SAN FRANCISCO — VeriSign Inc, the company in charge of delivering people safely to more than half the world's websites, has been hacked repeatedly by outsiders who stole undisclosed information from the leading Internet infrastructure company.

The previously unreported breaches occurred in 2010 at the Reston, Virginia-based company, which is ultimately responsible for the integrity of Web addresses ending in .com, .net and .gov.

VeriSign said its executives "do not believe these attacks breached the servers that support our Domain Name System network," which ensures people land at the right numeric Internet Protocol address when they type in a name such as Google.com, but it did not rule anything out.

VeriSign's domain-name system processes as many as 50 billion queries daily. Pilfered information from it could let hackers direct people to faked sites and intercept email from federal employees or corporate executives, though classified government data moves through more secure channels.

"Oh my God," said Stewart Baker, former assistant secretary of the Department of Homeland Security and before that the top lawyer at the National Security Agency. "That could allow people to imitate almost any company on the Net."

The VeriSign attacks were revealed in a quarterly U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filing in October that followed new guidelines on reporting security breaches to investors. It was the most striking disclosure to emerge in a review by Reuters of more than 2,000 documents mentioning breach risks since the SEC guidance was published.

Even if the name system is safe, VeriSign offers a number of other services where security is paramount. The company defends customers' websites from attacks and manages their traffic, and it researches international cybercrime groups.

VeriSign would possess sensitive information on customers, and its registry services that dispense website addresses would also be a natural target.

Ken Silva, who was VeriSign's chief technology officer for three years until November 2010, said he had not learned of the intrusion until contacted by Reuters. Given the time elapsed since the attack and the vague language in the SEC filing, he said VeriSign "probably can't draw an accurate assessment" of the damage.

Baker said VeriSign's description will lead people to "assume that it was a nation-state attack that is persistent, very difficult to eradicate and very difficult to put your hands around, so you can't tell where they went undetected."

VeriSign declined multiple interview requests, and senior employees said privately that they had not been given any more details than were in the filing. One said it was impossible to tell if the breach was the result of a concerted effort by a national power, though that was a possibility. "It's an ugly, slim sliver of facts. It's not enough," he said.

The 10-Q said that security staff responded to the attack soon afterward but failed to alert top management until September 2011. It says nothing about a continuing investigation, and the Department of Homeland Security did not respond to questions about an inquiry or recommendations for VeriSign customers.

Until August 2010, VeriSign was one of the largest providers of Secure Sockets Layer certificates, which Web browsers look for when connecting users to sites that begin "https," including most financial sites and some email and other communications portals.

If the SSL process were corrupted, "you could create a Bank of America certificate or Google certificate that is trusted by every browser in the world," said prominent security consultant Dmitri Alperovich, president of Asymmetric Cyber Operations.

VeriSign sold its certificate business in the summer of 2010 to Symantec Corp, which has kept the VeriSign brand name on those products.

Symantec spokeswoman Nicole Kenyon said "there is no indication that the 2010 corporate network security breach mentioned by VeriSign Inc was related to the acquired SSL product production systems."

Some smaller issuers of such validation certificates have been compromised in the past, and false certificates have been used to spread the most sophisticated malicious software yet detected, including Stuxnet, which attacked the Iranian nuclear program.

In written Senate testimony on Tuesday, U.S. Director of National Intelligence James Clapper called the known certificate breaches of 2011 "a threat to one of the most fundamental technologies used to secure online communications and sensitive transactions, such as online banking." Others have said SSL as a whole is no longer trustworthy and effective.

In a section of its filing devoted to risk factors, VeriSign said it was a frequent subject of "the most sophisticated form of attacks," including some that are "virtually impossible to anticipate and defend against."

Security experts said the breach reminded them of last year's attack on RSA, an authentication company owned by storage maker EMC Corp. RSA's SecurID tokens authorize remote access and have been in wide use by government agencies and military contractors including Lockheed Martin Corp, which said it was probed on the heels of the RSA breach.

"This breach, along with the RSA breach, puts the authentication mechanisms that are currently being used by businesses at risk," said Melissa Hathaway, a former intelligence official who led U.S. President Barack Obama's cybersecurity policy review and later pushed for the SEC guidance. "There appears to be a structured process of hunting those who provide authentication services."

Even if VeriSign's certificates were not compromised, a significant breach "means that prevention is futile," Alperovich said. He said he hoped new legislation on cybersecurity, expected to reach the Senate floor this month, would call for more disclosures and bring more aid to companies under attack.

White House: No decision yet on end to combat in Afghanistan

2012-02-02T11:09:00.002-10:00

While you probably won't receive so much as a virtual sack of FarmVille pumpkin seeds from Facebook's long-awaited IPO — set to grant Facebook's shareholders millions and billions — there is one thing you'll get out of the deal: a chance to ogle the social network's private business, sort of like it's been doing to you for years.

Privacy advocates have long scrutinized how Facebook deals with privacy and security of its users, but now that Facebook is going public, "disclosure rules affecting publicly traded companies may force Facebook to reveal privacy-related investigations that it otherwise might have kept secret," Ars Technica notes. What's more, the filing informs us about Facebook's own concerns.

The required IPO filing references Facebook's recent settlement with the Federal Trade Commission, stemming from social network's massive privacy rollback in 2009. It also makes note of a current privacy audit by the Ireland’s Data Protection Commissioner, the result of 22 complaints made against the social network by Austrian privacy advocacy, Europe versus Facebook.

Given Facebook's growing omnipresence in our daily lives, you've probably heard about one or both of these investigations, thanks to privacy watchdogs. But as Ars Technica points out, Facebook, as a private company, was never obligated to tell you. Now that it's going public, Facebook must tell the world what's going on, and how it might affect shareholders. Take, for example, this segment from Facebook's filing:

It is possible that a regulatory inquiry might result in changes to our policies or practices. Violation of existing or future regulatory orders or consent decrees could subject us to substantial monetary fines and other penalties that could negatively affect our financial condition and results of operations. In addition, it is possible that future orders issued by, or enforcement actions initiated by, regulatory authorities could cause us to incur substantial costs or require us to change our business practices in a manner materially adverse to our business.

"Facebook acknowledging the risks of privacy investigations, malware harming its systems and users and people abandoning the service if it becomes overwhelmed with spam shows they are cognizant of the risk and will now be even more motivated to reduce it," writes Sophos Senior Security Advisor Chester Wisniewski.

Even though most of us won't earn a dime from Facebook's IPO, our privacy and security may be all the richer for it.

White House: No decision yet on end to combat in Afghanistan

2012-02-02T11:06:00.001-10:00

By NBC News and news services

The White House is pushing back on the notion that a decision has been made about changing the timeline on an end to the United States' combat role in Afghanistan.

In a widely reported interview from aboard a plane en route to Brussels on Wednesday, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said the U.S. would end its combat role in Afghanistan as early as mid-2013.

Panetta: US to end combat in Afghanistan next year

But on Thursday, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney emphasized that nothing has changed in President Barack Obama's promised 2014 withdrawal from the 10-year war, NBC News reported.

"What Panetta said is that it could happen, that the transition to an Afghan security lead could be moved up to 2013, but he was not making an announcement about a decision that had been made," Carney said, NBC News reported. Panetta was just talking about discussions in Brussels, Carney said.

Still, U.S. military leaders joined NATO's top official and France in Brussels on Thursday in calling for Afghan forces to take the lead in all combat operations by mid-2013, The Associated Press reported.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy has also suggested in recent days that the coalition should gradually transition out of combat in 2013.

In 2010, NATO leaders agreed that Afghan forces would take control province by province until they have full responsibility for security in all of Afghanistan by the end of 2014. Until now, it was widely assumed that coalition troops would retain the lead role in military operations until that final handover.

End of combat mission in Afghanistan doesn't mean safety for US forces
But under the arrangement being discussed by NATO defense ministers in Brussels this week, coalition troops would no longer lead combat missions after mid- to late-2013, although they would still provide assistance to the Afghans.

Although some officials insisted publicly that the allies were united in the transition goals, a senior NATO official told The Associated Press that there is some disagreement about the newly suggested timeframe.

The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity in order to discuss closed-door discussions, said the expectation is that no final decision on the timing is expected before the NATO summit in Chicago in May.

Speaking to reporters before the two-day meeting in Brussels, NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said Afghanistan remains the alliance's top operational priority, and that the coalition has been making progress in the war.

Obama may keep his job even if you lose yours

2012-02-02T11:04:00.002-10:00

By John W. Schoen, Senior Producer

The conventional wisdom among many political pundits is that President Barack Obama faces an uphill re-election battle in large part because unemployment seems stuck at historically high levels. Economists who have studied the impact of the job market on past elections beg to disagree.

It’s true that no president since Franklin Roosevelt has been elected when the unemployment rate was over 7.2 percent. That was where the jobless rate stood in 1984, when Ronald Reagan won a second term, beating Walter Mondale in a landslide, with 59 percent of the popular vote.

The jobless rate stood at 7.4 percent when George H.W. Bush lost his 1992 re-election bid against challenger Bill Clinton; it was at 7.5 percent in November 1980, when Jimmy Carter lost his job to Reagan.

If that were the only statistic that mattered, Obama indeed would have his work cut out for him.

Though the job market began gradually improving in the second half of last year, employment growth remains sluggish. The jobless rate dropped by a sharp 0.5 percentage point in the last three months of 2011 but currently stands at 8.5 percent and is expected to show little or no improvement when the government reports updated January data on Friday. Some forecasters caution the rate might even rise again this year as “discouraged” workers, who are not included in the official "headline" rate, begin looking for work again and raise the count of those considered unemployed.

But a high unemployment rate, by itself, isn’t necessarily a problem for an incumbent president, according to Ray Fair, a Yale University economist who has analyzed the impact of the economy on presidential elections back to 1916.

“What the data show is that it’s the change in the economy, primarily in the year of the election, that matters — not the level,” he said.

So far, the trend is moving in the right direction. But it could easily be derailed by this fall.

Fair’s current forecasts show a very close race. But his models show that Obama still stands a good chance of re-election even with a relatively modest drop in the unemployment rate by November.

“When they go to the booth, voters would see this as a positive sign: Obama’s got the economy growing again,” said Fair. "Even though the unemployment rate is higher than full employment, the trend is good and things are improving.”

Reagan’s 1984 re-election is a good example of that scenario: at 7.2 percent in November, the jobless rate was down more than a full percentage point from a year earlier as the economy continued to shake off the lingering impact of the 1980-1982 recession that sent the jobless rate soaring to 10.8 percent.

To capitalize on the high level of unemployment, GOP presidential hopefuls have hammered Obama's economic record, blaming a variety of White House policies for the weak job market. Front-runner Mitt Romney has tried to make the case that, if elected, the former Massachusetts Republican and Bain Capital president would apply his business experience to do a better job putting Americans back to work.

But for all the money spent on political advertising, the airtime devoted to debates and the miles logged in campaign jets and busses, the GOP attacks and Romney’s 162-page policy proposal may not mean much, say some analysts.

The correlation between economics and presidential elections is so strong, they say, that most of the attention on wider issues and policy differences -- from fiscal matters like taxes and the deficit, to social issues like income inequality and immigration -- have very little impact on voters’ final decision.

“Political scientists don’t tend to think the specifics of the challengers platform matter all that much,” said Brendan Nyhan, a government Professor at Dartmouth College. “Incumbent re-elections are primarily a referendum on the incumbent and specifically on their economic record. If the economy is strong, the challenger may try to shift onto some other issue, but that rarely works.”

Even as the economy continues to muddle through at a relatively weak growth pace, Obama may also be in a position to play a few important cards not available to his Republican challenger.

Incumbents have long used the power of the White House to enact programs and policies that help give the economy a jolt in the months before voters go the polls. Richard Nixon famously pressured then-Federal Reserve Board chairman Arthur Burns to cut interest rates to help spur the economy in the months ahead of his successful 1972 re-election despite widespread opposition to his administration’s Vietnam War policies.

That’s increased the stakes in the ongoing debate over extending payroll tax cuts and long-term unemployment insurance. Both measures, if enacted, would improve American households' spending power and improve their sense of personal financial well-being. If Republican’s succeed in block or paring down those measures, the impact on consumer spending could create a further drag on the economy just in time for the campaign’s home stretch this fall.

Those two pocketbook helpers, though, may be Obama’s last chance to give the economy the momentum he’ll need to fend off voters’ money malaise, according to Mark Zandi, an economist with Moody’s Analytics and former advisor to 2008 GOP presidential hopeful John McCain.

“It’s going to be difficult to pass any legislation at this point in time for it to flow through to the economy,” he said. “It takes time -- not weeks, but the next quarter or two. So time is running out to make a difference.”

VeriSign, at Web's core, is hacked: What does it mean to you?

2012-02-02T10:58:00.000-10:00

It should be clear by now that nothing online is sacred, and no security company is safe from hackers. VeriSign Inc., the firm at the center of so many critical systems on the Web, was infiltrated by hackers in 2010. Because details of the attack, first disclosed Thursday by Reuters, are so vague we are left to assume the worst -- and the worst is pretty bad.

It's possible that the VeriSign hackers could turn the Web upside down and create an Internet where nothing would be what it seems. A hacker website could look and act just like your bank's website. Your PC could easily be tricked into downloading automatic software updates that would appear authentic but actually contain viruses. And no matter what web address you typed into your browser, you could be redirected to a criminal's website half-way around the world.

But there's important context to this story which might ratchet down the "Oh My God!" factor considerably. For starters, there is reason to believe that VeriSign's revelation is nothing more than evidence companies are starting to comply with rules forcing them to disclose such incidents: In other words, similar successful hacks like this may have occurred in the past but simply went unreported. We'll discuss the evidence for that in a moment. First, let's look at the possibilities raised by the VeriSign attack.

VeriSign is involved in two distinct, fundamental Internet security structures that could be impacted by this attack. A successful attack on one would be serious, but a raid on the other could threaten the Internet itself. So let's start there.

VeriSign's most critical function is its role in the Domain Name System address book, which governs what happens when Web users type common name Web addresses into their browsers. There are 13 "root" DNS servers placed strategically around the planet for redundancy. VeriSign operates two of them. Should a hacker gain access to this part of VeriSign's business, he or she could theoretically poison the other 11 root DNS servers, and the bad data would eventually spread to the other DNS servers. The consequences could be dire: It could mean that everyone who typed "msnbc.com" into a Web browser would be sent to a computer controlled by criminals, instead of the real msnbc.com website. A computer criminal with destructive intensions could theoretically ruin the database that maps names with IP addresses and effectively shut down parts of the Internet. It has long been discussed that these root name servers are perhaps the most vulnerable point of the attack on the Internet

But it's more likely that the agencies controlling the other 11 root Domain Name Servers would be able to regain control of the DNS table and restore the system within a day or two, if not within hours. As you might imagine, root DNS servers do disagree from time to time and there is a process for handling that.

It's also important to note that VeriSign, in the SEC disclosure which started this incident, claims that its DNS servers were not attacked by hackers.

"Access was gained to information on a small portion of our computers and servers. We have investigated and do not believe these attacks breached the servers that support our Domain Name System ("DNS") network," the firm wrote in the filing.

VeriSign's other crucial function is issuing digital certificates through its VeriSign Authentication Services group. Certificates impact your computer use every day because they tell your PC that a company's website or software is really what is says it is. Certificates are a crucial part of the SSL system that ultimately displays a friendly looking lock when you visit your online bank. They also identify the legitimacy of software updates sent to your computer by software makers. Many modern PCs won't install software unless it is digitally signed.

A hacker who could influence the way VeriSign issues certificates would be a massive problem for both consumers and corporations.

"VeriSign is one of the most important enterprise trust authorities in the world, which delivers people safely to more than half the world's websites,” wrote Catalin Cosoi, CTO of WhiteHat Security and director of the Online Threats Labs for BitDefender. “A certificate issued by VeriSign will automatically be accepted by both browsers and operating systems. This kind of incident practically voids all the security provided by 64-bit operating systems,"

In other words, hackers would have an easy time loading viruses onto PCs around the world.

That's terrible, but it's not new. Virus writers have been compromising certificate issuers with abandon for the past 18 months. It's one of the reasons that Stuxnet computer virus managed to infect millions of PCs worldwide. That also means structures are in place to deal with fraudulent certificates.

"The worst case scenario would be several phishing attacks with valid certificates that browsers will render as legit," Cosoi said. "This would potentially yield a huge level of data that could be exploited for financial gain. However, it’s important to remember that a strong anti-phishing solution will keep you protected."

Of course, it's not even clear from VeriSign's filing that its certificate business was compromised. Complicating matters further: Symantec Corp. purchased most of that business from VeriSign last year. For its part, Symantec said on Thursday that the assets it acquired in the sale were not compromised.

"We want to make it very clear that Symantec takes the security and proper functionality of its solutions very seriously. The Trust Services (SSL), User Authentication (VIP) and other production systems acquired by Symantec were not compromised by the corporate network security breach mentioned in the VeriSign, Inc. quarterly filing," said Symantec spokeswoman Nicole Kenyon in a statement to msnbnc.com.

Of course, it’s possible that one of Verison’s other business unit – it provides extensive security consulting, for example – was the hackers’ only target. That seems unlikely, however, given the target-rich environment the offers to computer criminals.

Finally, it's possible the VeriSign admission, buried in an SEC filing from last year, is nothing more than paperwork which puts in print something that security professionals have long understood: No firm is safe from hackers. This might be at once comforting and disturbing: In October of last year, the SEC issued guidelines that called out public firms for under-disclosing security leaks and hinted strongly that fines would come when firms failed to report successful hacker attacks. The VeriSign quarterly report was issued soon after, and it's easy to imagine the disclosure is more routine than anyone would like to admit. In fact, Stewart Baker, a lawyer at Steptoe & Johnson, predicted as much in a blog earlier this month.

"With enforcement so easy, and the harm from breaches so tangible, so serious and so likely to bring headlines, no one should expect the enforcers to go easy on companies that have been slow to disclose. Instead I expect a growing wave of cases based on companies' failure to make timely disclosure of ongoing breaches," he wrote.

Clearly, admission by VeriSign that executives at the firm were unaware of the breach shows a terrible lack of coordination inside the firm. And it's scary to read this admission, too: "Given the nature of such attacks, we cannot assure that our remedial actions will be sufficient to thwart future attacks or prevent the future loss of information."

Still, it’s important to note that we are talking about attacks that could be a year old, and whatever they were, criminals are already deep in the process of exploiting them. Sad to say there’s nothing most consumers can do in response to this report.

In health news, there’s always the complicated issue of increased diagnosis vs. increased incidence. Is a new disease on the rise, or are we simply better at finding cases of it? The VeriSign incident raises the same question.

But the deeper truth here is probably something that professionals have known for some time: In the cat and mouse game between hackers and security firms, hackers are winning and, in some places, it's starting to look like a blowout.

Fla. teenage crash survivor won't be deported

2012-02-02T10:46:00.004-10:00

Immigration officials say the lone survivor of a family killed in a mile-long pileup along Interstate 75 on Sunday south of Gainesville, Fla. will not be deported.

Relatives who want Lidiane Carmo, 15, to live with them in the United States feared she may be deported. The Carmo family moved to the U.S. from Brazil 12 years ago, NBC station WXIA reported. They were undocumented, WXIA said.

Lidiane Carmo, 15, a ninth-grader at Sprayberry High School in Marietta, Ga. was part of a group of 15 from the International Church of the Restoration in Marietta. They were returning home after a three-day religious conference in Orlando, Fla.

A mix of fog and smoke from a nearby brush fire made visibility difficult on six-lane I-75 on Sunday when at least a dozen cars, six tractor-trailers and a motor-home collided. Wreckage was so bad that it took more than two days to find the accident's 11th victim, who was in a pickup truck where two bodies were discovered earlier, officials said Wednesday.

Jose Carmo Jr., 43, a founding pastor of the church, his wife, Adriana, 39 and their oldest daughter, Leticia, 17 died in the crash. Lidiane Carmo's uncle, Edsom, 38, and his girlfriend, Rose DeSilva, 41, also died. The teen is hospitalized in Gainesville with serious injuries. She was told Tuesday her family had died.

At a church meeting Tuesday night, Brazil's deputy consul general in Atlanta, Ana Rodrigues, offered the government's condolences, but could not promise any help or hope.

"Immigration issues are a matter of the American government," Rodrigues said.

And she was not able to say whether the Brazilian government would be able to consider the family's request for financial help to fly the bodies back to Marietta for the funerals, and to Brazil for the burials.

'Disgusted beyond belief': Parents shaken by ex-Calif. teacher's molestation charges

2012-02-02T07:53:00.002-10:00

By msnbc.com staff and news services

LOS ANGELES -- There was never any outward indication that anything was wrong in Mark Berndt's classroom at Miramonte Elementary School in south Los Angeles. School officials and law enforcement authorities say they never received any complaints about the third-grade teacher, who is accused of blindfolding students, putting tape on their mouths and taking photos of them with live cockroaches or a spoon full of semen.

The photographs, brought to the attention of authorities last January by a film processor, eventually led to Berndt's arrest on Monday on charges that he committed lewd acts on 23 boys and girls, ages 6 to 10, between 2008 and 2010.

The 61-year-old made his first court appearance on Wednesday. His bail was raised to $23 million from $2.3 million. His arraignment was scheduled for Feb. 21.

"If it wasn't for the film processor, this could still be continuing today," sheriff's Lt. Carlos Marquez told the Associated Press.

Damian Dovarganes / AP

Students are escorted to a waiting bus as they leave Miramonte Elementary school after classes Tuesday.

Five more children have contacted sheriff's investigators since Berndt's arrest, which could lead to additional charges, the Los Angeles Times reported Wednesday.

Los Angeles Unified School District Superintendent John Deasy told msnbc.com on Tuesday that there was nothing in Berndt’s 30-year record with the school district to indicate a problem. “Not so much as a single complaint,” he said.

"I am disgusted beyond belief," Deasy said. "I'm a dad as well as a superintendent and it's horrifying."

Some parents picking up their students at the school on Tuesday complained that school officials should have notified them when the photos were discovered last year. Berndt was fired immediately after the investigation began, and placed under surveillance, but parents didn't learn why until this week.

"My concern is why, if the principal knew this in advance, why didn't he inform us?" Gloria Polanco, the mother of a second- and a third-grader, said to the Associated Press. "How long has he been doing this?"

Deborah Harmon, whose 7-year-old granddaughter goes to the elementary, was also upset about the length of time it took school administrators to notify parents of the allegations.

"It’s a sense of violation and betrayal because you think that your children are safe when you send them to school but they’re not safe," Harmon told NBCLosAngeles.com.

The photographs uncovered reveal disturbing images. Some allegedly show Berndt with his arm around the children or with his hand over their mouths, according to a statement by the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department. In addition, authorities say the images depict girls with a blue plastic spoon filled with a substance, later determined to be semen. There were also photos of children with large, live Madagascar-type cockroaches on their faces and mouths.

Early in the investigation, Special Victims Bureau detectives say they recovered a blue plastic spoon and an empty container from the trash in Bernd't classroom. The recovered items tested positive for semen, authorities said, and the suspect's DNA matched the DNA profile found on the spoon and container.

"We ended up finding out through DNA that the white substance was bodily fluids from our suspect," Marquez told NBCLosAngeles.com.

A search warrant served by detectives on Berndt's home also led to the discovery of more than 100 similar photographs depicting children, authorities aid. Also found was a DVD depicting adult sexual "bondage" activity. The adults in that DVD are not identified, according to detectives.

Investigators are still working to identify 10 of the child victims in the 390 photos uncovered.

Authorities are recommending the children be tested for sexually transmitted diseases, the Associated Press reported.

That embarrassing Christina Aguilera photo that has everyone talking-cringing

2012-01-31T17:11:00.001-10:00

Christina Aguilera‘s life in the public eye is starting to play out like every possible nightmare scenario of every kid in high school, isn’t it? She went through a questionable fashion phase, constantly vied for the spotlight against her rival, messed up the national anthem during a big game, fell down in front of everyone, endured a painful split, was picked on for her weight, and then got in, like, so much trouble. And while Aguilera has graduated to full-fledged adult, the nightmare still hasn’t ended there, seeing as life is one endless loop of high school hell. (No one tells you that, kids!)

Image Credit: Toby Canham/Getty Images

Over the weekend The Voice mentor sang at the memorial service for the late, great Etta James. But, it wasn’t her rendition of the legend’s classic song “At Last” or even her cleavage-baring funeral wear that’s had people talking. In a widely seen photo that’s so embarrassing you will want to move towns, it appears a liquid is running down the Grammy-winning pop star’s leg. Some are speculating that it’s menstrual blood (a theory that made the coolest guy in school Neil Patrick Harris gag), but an insider assured US Weekly that it was nothing more than a spray tan runoff. (“It was her proudest moment [singing for Etta James.] The sweat caused her spray tan to streak,” the source explained.)

Still, even if the latter is the truth, Aguilera likely won’t get to live this one down anytime soon. Such are the perils of adulthood. Come on, guys, give the poor girl a break. For once.

Do you sorta feel bad for Christina Aguilera after this picture, too, PopWatchers? At this point would The Voice‘s spinning chair have to go haywire and fling her across the stage to make the least embarrassing thing to happen to her this year? Wasn’t high school the freakin’ worst?

Twilight” star Ashley Greene is on the cover of Lucky Magazine this month

2012-01-31T17:07:00.001-10:00

“Twilight” star Ashley Greene is on the cover of Lucky Magazine this month, opening up about where she plans to go after she retires her fangs, making out with Olivia Wilde and why she doesn’t want a serious relationship.

On making out with Olivia Wilde in her upcoming film Butter: “It wasn’t that awkward,” Greene says. “It’s the same idea as having to kiss a male costar and it’s not real. Olivia is such a cool chick and very professional. So we were just messing around and cracking up in between scenes, and it ended up being really fun.” She smiles. “And now I’m the envy of every straight male everywhere!”

On what she finds attractive in a man: “What’s most attractive to me is someone who has the same amount of drive as I do, someone who’s equally busy,” she says. “But I think that would be a tall order.”

On why she doesn’t want to be distracted by a serious relationship: “I’m so laser-focused on my career, because when you’re dealt these cards, if you don’t kind of run with it, then you’re an idiot,” she says. “You gotta take advantage of what you’ve been given.”

On why you won’t see her at nightclubs: “It’s all the glitz and glamour in Hollywood, and you want to be part of it. And the deadly thing is that you meet people who do have the money and do have fame and are in a position to not spend every waking moment working toward getting a job, and it’s easy to feel like you can do it too, when really you haven’t earned it. You can either socialize or you can study you script, and luckily I learned that pretty quick!”

One her secret (and useful) talent: “When I took the modeling classes in Florida, they had us walk in crazy heels and do the whole runway thing. And actually?” Greene says, laughing. “That’s been very helpful, because I can walk and run in pretty much anything! And they will have you run in heels in films, as ridiculous that sounds.”

On establishing herself in Hollywood: “Twilight has given me something to skyrocket off of,” Greene says. “But now that it’s ending, there’s so much work to be done. And if I don’t do it then Twilight’s all I’m ever going to be known for, as great as it is.”

On her game plan post Twilight: “Basically I went from ‘dying to get a gig’ to dying to get the gig everyone wants,’” she says. “So now I’m in this realm with a lot of highly respected actresses, which is an amazing place to be, but also kind of terrifying.”

On finding out she’d gotten a role in ‘Twilight’: “I answered a little grumpily, but when my agent told me the news, I freaked out and called my parents—and my dad almost cried, which was kind of cool,” she says with a big smile. “My dad was a Marine; he doesn’t cry a lot.”

Who is the most desirable woman of 2012?

2012-01-31T17:04:00.001-10:00

Nobody fills out a dress like Sofia Vergara ... so it's no surprise that the almost cartoonishly curvy "Modern Family" actress is the top hottie on AskMen's 11th Annual "Top 99 Most Desirable Women" list.

What happened to last year's winner, Blake Lively? The "Gossip Girl" is not even in the top nine this year, slipping down to the lowly #31 spot.

SODAHEAD SLIDESHOW: See the hottest women on AskMen's "Top 99 Most Desirable Women" list.

In fact, the top nine ladies may surprise you in more ways than one. For starters, who the heck is the #2 spot-holder, Kate Upton? Rooney Mara is pretty, but she needs to smile more ... and eat a sandwich. And we love Nicki Minaj, but is she really the fifth most desirable woman in the world?

PHOTOS: See the latest celebrity pictures to hit the Internet.

Kelly Clarkson to sing national anthem at this year's Super Bowl

2012-01-31T16:22:00.001-10:00

Kelly Clarkson will sing the national anthem at Super Bowl XLVI, the NFL confirmed Tuesday.

The Dallas native and winner of the first "American Idol" competition will belt out "The Star-Spangled Banner" before the championship game Sunday between the New York Giants and the New England Patriots.

Country couple Blake Shelton and Miranda Lambert, who married last May, will also take the stage to sing "America the Beautiful" before the game at Lucas Oil Stadium in Indianapolis.

Rocker Lenny Kravitz and Colorado-based band The Fray will also be featured in the line-up for the pregame entertainment.

Madonna will perform during the game's half-time show. She will reportedly be joined by hip-hop star Nicki Minaj, electronic pop group LMFAO and rapper Cee Lo Green.

What a $50,000 Ticket to P. Diddy's Grammy Party Buys You

2012-01-31T16:07:00.002-10:00

Have $50,000 to burn? You could be hanging with P.Diddy on music's biggest night of the year.
The hip-hop mogul is throwing a post-Grammy's bash on Feb. 12 at the Playboy Mansion, with tickets retailing for $50,000. The party will benefit AngelWish.org and will also honor Hugh Hefner as the charity's "Humanitarian of the Year," according to www.WantTickets.com.
Those willing to fork over the dough can party in the 'Monster Cabana' which comes with "security, privacy and exclusivity at this event," the site said. The ticket also comes with 20 VIP admissions and the cabana can hold up to 30 people. And, to top it off, those who buy the package also receive dinner, open bar, free bottle service all night long and "fifteen dedicated female promotional models."
Dorothy Casceceri, senior editor at In Touch Weekly, said Diddy is trying to make it more accessible for the masses by offering lower-priced tickets, which retail for $1,500 and cover general admission. Other tickets are available for $2,500, $7,500, $15,000, and $25,000, according to the site.
"At least some people will have a chance at going, but I don't know how many people can really write checks for $15,000," Casceceri said. "The $50,000 ticket, truth be told, is a drop in the bucket for people in Hollywood. Celebrities, professional athletes—they wouldn't think twice about spending $50,000 to invite 20 of their closest friends, feed them all night, have bottle service all night and have a private area to hang out in all night."
For a charity event, the ticket price isn't all that high, she said, and does offer a lot to those who can afford it. As for the "cool" factor of spending that kind of cash to be in P.Diddy's company, Caseceri said that as long as it's for a good cause, there's nothing uncool about it.
"A good percent of the people paying $50,000 will be his friends. They could probably hang out with him for free but are willing to spending that money because it will benefit charity and this sounds like a good party," she said. "It's like if I told my friends I was doing a charity fundraiser at a bar and the cover was $20."

Romney wins Florida GOP primary, Fox News projects

2012-01-31T16:02:00.002-10:00

Mitt Romney defeated Newt Gingrich in the Florida Republican presidential primary Tuesday night, Fox News projects, surging from a second-place finish in South Carolina to sweep the winner-take-all contest and reassert his frontrunner status.

The victory, in the biggest GOP contest to date, is likely to give the former Massachusetts governor a burst of momentum as he, Gingrich, Rick Santorum and Ron Paul head west to battle in what has become an increasingly negative race.

At his victory speech in Tampa, the site of the Republican National Convention, Romney glided over his opponents and focused his remarks almost exclusively on President Obama.

"I stand ready to lead this party and to lead our nation," Romney said. "My leadership will end the Obama era and begin a new era of American prosperity."

But the former House speaker is vowing a drawn-out battle for delegates as the Republican race turns next to Nevada, and then a batch of primaries in western and Midwestern states.

With 74 percent of precincts reporting, Romney is leading with 47 percent. Gingrich has 32 percent, followed by Rick Santorum with 13 percent and Ron Paul with 7 percent. Fox News projects Gingrich will finish second, followed by Santorum in third and Paul in last place.

Romney is projected to win all 50 of Florida's convention delegates.

With his Florida victory, Romney is the only Republican candidate to have won two primaries. In a historical anomaly, the first three contests went to three different winners.

Romney was initially declared the winner of the leadoff Iowa caucuses, but the Iowa GOP later called the race for Santorum. Romney scored a decisive victory in New Hampshire, but Gingrich answered back with a come-from-behind win in South Carolina.

Gingrich has held a narrow lead in most recent national polls. But the results Tuesday mark a serious setback for the former House speaker, who was leading Romney in Florida polls as recently as last week.

Gingrich, after dominating the debates in the run up to South Carolina, was more subdued on stage ahead of Florida -- while Romney aggressively challenged Gingrich's attacks on his personal wealth and his immigration position. Both campaigns, and the groups that support them, were on air with scorching attack ads in the Sunshine State.

Florida's primary is the most valuable so far in pure numbers. With the awarding of Florida's 50 delegates, Romney will have 87 delegates nationally, compared with 26 for Gingrich. Santorum will remain at 14 delegates and Paul stands with four. It takes 1,144 delegates to clinch the Republican nomination.

In a positive sign for Gingrich, exit polls showed evangelical voters trending for the former House speaker. The exit polls showed Gingrich with 40 percent among that group, and Romney with 36 percent.

But the margin was wider for Romney among seniors and Hispanics. Half of the seniors polled were supporting Romney, while 35 percent backed Gingrich. Romney also led Gingrich 56-29 percent among Hispanic voters, the largest minority in the state, exit polling showed.

Voters overwhelmingly went for Romney among those who said winning in November is the most important quality in a Republican nominee. But for voters who valued "true conservative" credentials as their top quality, Gingrich led with 46 percent, followed by Santorum at 26 percent and Paul at 16 percent. Among those voters, Romney was last with 11 percent.

5 Reasons One Parent Should Stay at Home

2012-01-31T15:10:00.000-10:00

The benefits of a single-income household.If you total every expense from child care and health care to groceries and recreation, the first 18 years of a child's life can cost a small fortune -- $190,528 to be exact. Child care alone can cost around $4,300 a year for one child, according to Bankrate.com.

So, let's say you have two kids. If one parent stays home instead of working, you could save close to $10,000 a year.

For most couples, deciding who works and who stays home comes down to plain economics. Some parents would love to be able to stay home with their child, but they simply can't afford it. Others love their kids but also love to work. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, more than half of American children live in two-income households.

Still, a family can benefit by sticking to the one-income model. Here are five practical reasons why one parent should stay at home:

1. Money
Wait… what?! Isn't it kind of a no-brainer that having both parents work means much more money and fewer financial stresses? Not exactly.

Don't get me wrong, it can be more financially viable for both parents to work, but not always. The child care costs I mentioned before are just one piece of the puzzle.

Let's say you make $30,000 per year. That is $2,500 per month gross, and around $1,500 after taxes, including social security and medicare withholding.

The cost to commute to and from work, including gas, insurance, an occasional $5 coffee and lunch out, can add up to more than $300 a month.

Work clothes can be another expense for many working Americans that can cost around $100 per month. And what about food? When both parents are working, there is less time to cook, meaning more money spent at restaurants.

[InvestingAnswers Feature: "Save Hundreds of Dollars on Groceries (And Other Expenses)."]

2. Time
Parenting is a full-time job. If both parents work full-time jobs, they will have less time to spend with their children. Most full-time employees don't work 40 hours a week. According to the United Nations, more than 85% of men and 65% of women work more than 40 hours. Needless to say, in most professional jobs, you will spend more than 40 hours a week working. Add in at least an hourly commute every day and you are pushing at least 50 hours a week.

Obviously, work isn't the only thing that will keep you from spending time with your child. Taking care of the house and running errands drains the time spent with children, but that can be minimized if one parent stays at home.

3. Energy
Families where both parents work full-time have less time to spend with their child, and the time they do have to spend is typically their "bad hours," or times when you aren't at your best.

Anytime you are tired, hungry, distracted and need alone time to unwind means it is tough to be attentive. With one parent at home during the day, the child can experience the best hours, with the most energy, of that parent. If the working parent can spend extra time with the children on the weekends, the parent who stays home can use that time to relax a little.

4. Bonding
By staying at home, a parent has the chance to see all of their child's firsts, and act as a positive influence during the formative years. Of course, you can absolutely find caring environments in a day care or with the right babysitter, but you have to consider frequent turnover and high student-to-teacher ratios in some programs.

According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, regardless of quality, children with a higher quantity of non-parental care exhibited increased behavioral problems.

While the job can be thankless at times, it can also be the most rewarding job on the planet. You might want to pull your hair out when your kid decides to eat the dog food, but does anything compare to her hug? During tough times in the office, a hug from Terry in accounting is just not the same.

How many people do you know who get to the end of their life and wish they had spent more time working and less time with their families? You can't pin a dollar sign on the value of spending time with your children.

5. Stress
No, I'm not saying parenting is a stress-free occupation, but it can certainly beat juggling a full-time career at the same time. Striking a satisfactory balance between work and family is a constant struggle, and some parents decide that juggling is just not worth it. By staying at home with a child, a parent doesn't feel pressure to squeeze activities and moments into their day simply because they have time.

Striking a Balance
Now, I'm not advocating a time warp to the 1950s where women had few choices but to stay at home. While the majority of stay-at-home parents today are still women, there are about 158,000 stay-at-home dads, according to the 2010 Census. That number is growing, considering many fathers are working from home, but still act as the primary caregiver.

A happy medium is for the parent that stays home with the child to work part-time. It is no easy task to juggle raising a child full-time with an added part-time job on the side, but it could offer the best of both worlds. With an increasing number of workers requesting the flexibility of working from home, part-time work is easier now than ever.

The Investing Answer: Having one parent stay at home with the children can be cost-effective and a great investment in the emotional well being of your entire family. Having a parent stay home and work a part-time job, while still caring for a child, gives a family the best of both worlds. But this might not be an option in every case. Every family has to look at their situation and weigh the costs and benefits of every child care option.

America's 10 "Youngest" Cities

2012-01-31T15:08:00.002-10:00

How Is Your City Doing?
Just as with individuals, lifestyle choices have a big impact on a city's age, says RealAge cofounder Michael F. Roizen, MD. "Stress, smoking, ... more

Is your city keeping you young? The RealAge Test calculates how quickly -- or slowly -- a person's body is aging compared to his or her chronological age. For the RealAge 2012 Youngest & Oldest Cities in America report, we analyzed RealAge Test data from more than 28 million people to rank America's 50 largest metropolitan areas and uncover the best places to stay young. Find out how your favorite cities fared.

Paula Abdul and Nicole Scherzinger gone from 'X Factor'? Good!

2012-01-31T15:06:00.001-10:00

“X Factor” is coming back for a second season in the fall, but not without a lot of changes. With host Steve Jones and judges Nicole Scherzinger and Paula Abdul confirmed goners, it’s clear that the powers that be recognized that for all the flash and dazzle, the show didn’t work in its freshman year.

An early report has executive producer and judge Simon Cowell focusing on getting a bigger name to replace Paula. That’s great for the tabloid ink that would follow, but it should absolutely not be the primary goal. “X Factor” doesn’t need famous women on its four-judge panel.

It needs stronger women.

One huge weakness on "X Factor" was that the men and women on the podium seemed to be playing different games. Simon and fellow judge L.A. Reid were in competition with each other and played their parts well. They tossed barbs at each other. They criticized each other’s singers. Neither was unfair, and both were almost always pleasant to the contestants, but they gave the impression that each wanted to do better than the other.

Paula and Nicole? Not so much. Nicole traded insults with Simon, but you had to be paying close attention to find them amidst her rambles. Paula was out of the competition so quickly that she mostly just sat back and agonized over who to vote off. They were just taking up space, drinking Pepsi products and whining about their jobs.

And therein lies the problem.

Haven’t we seen enough of women playing the "It's too HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARD" role on these shows? Could “X Factor” really not find women more capable of being critical, telling contestants when they weren’t good enough and throwing elbows at the men on the panel?

Or did they even look? Because let’s be honest, the casting choices weren’t creative for the first season. Simon picked a friend for one seat in Paula, and then the show decided to slide Nicole over from her hosting duties when Cheryl Cole got sent back to England. Far from conducting a wide search, it just picked the easiest targets it could find.

That failed. What worked between Simon and Paula on “Idol” did not work on “X Factor.” Everything about the show is supposed to be intense, from the lavish production to the prize money to the hype, and Paula’s not that kind of TV personality. She needs Ryan Seacrest and Broadway Night, not this.

Nicole’s failure may be more surprising. When she’s performing, she looks like someone who could eviscerate Simon and L.A. in between the introduction and the chorus. But on the podium ... not so much. She spent the whole season trying out wardrobes and personalities to find one that worked, and none fit. And as the Rachel Crow debacle made clear, decisiveness is not her strong suit.

So here's what "X Factor" needs: Strong women. Judges who aren't afraid to throw some elbows. Ladies who know that judging means being mean to people every now and then, and who are comfortable with it. And women who want to win.

For example, how about Jennifer Hudson? The former “Idol” contestant wasn’t afraid to spar with the Simon as a hopeful on that show and still holds a grudge for her early exit. Bring her back to settle the score. Or find a record executive who’s unknown right now but can quickly make a name for herself by smacking the boys down with some withering comment Either way, the challenge is clear: Find women who can do the tough work and enjoy it, rather than just big names or pretty faces -- or the show fails.

Celine Dion Suffers Wardrobe Malfunction In Jamaica

2012-01-31T15:02:00.000-10:00

The only thing worse than a wardrobe malfunction is a wardrobe malfunction... down there.

Celine Dion surprised audience members at a concert on Friday when she took to the stage in at the Jamaica Jazz and Blues Festival in a teeny gold Balmain minidress. The long-sleeve bodice of the dress stayed on, but the short hemline gave show goers sitting below a bit more than they bargained for, according to E! News.

Dion told Zappos Couture's "The Trend" that "normally when people are level the length [of the dress] is fine. But people were like this (looks up)... So it was like I didn't think of the people downstairs and me there."

Whoops. Luckily Celine's confidence wasn't shaken, as the 43-year-old mother of twins is used to braving the stage in barely-there dresses (even just five months after giving birth). She did, however, spend the rest of the Jamaican festival in longer frocks.

Kim, Kourtney & Khloe Kardashian Go Topless In New Jeans Ad (PHOTO)

2012-01-31T15:00:00.001-10:00

The Kardashian sisters bare their souls on reality TV, and now they're baring much more for their new jeans line. Kim, Kourtney and Khloe are topless, letting the jeans sell themselves, in a new ad for their Kardashian Kollection denim line.

The jeans come in three different cuts to flatter every body type, and Kardashian Kollection co-creator Bruno Schivai told Celebuzz he was thrilled with the addition to their line sold exclusively at Sears. Schivai also let it slip that soon you'll be able to decorate your entire home in the Kardashian aesthetic.

"We're very excited about it ... Home looks incredible. There are three designs in home, everything from [bedding] to cushions and pillows, to bathroom accessories and shower curtains," he said. "And swimwear of course is to die for. We are shooting our new swim campaign actually in January."

If the Kardashian sisters are willing to flaunt this much skin for their denim line, we're willing to bet their swimwear ads will be even sexier.

PHOTO:

Lamar Odom Confesses To Khloe Kardashian He's Jealous Kourtney Is Pregnant

2012-01-31T14:56:00.000-10:00

It's no secret Khloe Kardashian and Lamar Odom want a baby, but season two of their reality show, "Khloe & Lamar," will take an intimate look into their painful struggle to start a family.

Khloe recently denied that she's undergoing fertility treatments, writing on Twitter, "Because there seems to be much speculation, here is my statement... I am not at this time in my life considering any type of fertility treatments. If and when I do, I will shout it from the rooftops but for now its in Gods hands."

But in an extended promo that aired after the season finale of "Kourtney & Kim Take New York," viewers got a first look at the emotional toll their fertility issues are taking on them. In one clip Khloe asks Lamar, "“Were you jealous that Kourtney got pregnant again?” And he admits, "Yes, they get to have another baby and I don't."

It's heartbreaking to watch, but it's just part of the drama in the couple's lives, as season two of "Khloe & Lamar" documents their move to Dallas after Lamar was traded to the Mavericks.

Khloe has been nothing but supportive of her sister since she announced she was pregnant, and we can't imagine how hard it must be to hear Lamar (who has Destiny, 13, Lamar Jr., 8, and Jayden, who tragically died at the age of 6-months from SIDS in 2006, with ex-girlfriend Liza Morales) admit he's jealous.

Last week Khloe shared a 30-second trailer for the show on her blog and wrote:

"Just wanted to share this Khloe & Lamar sneak peek from the upcoming season. It premieres February 19 and I could not be more excited! So much has happened this season with Lamar’s trade, the move and all of the other fun/drama in our lives. The move definitely plays a huge part in the show, and as you’ll see it was definitely an adjustment for everyone. But no matter what, at the end of the day, Lam and I have each other and that’s all that matters :)"

Kardashians' Hot Bikini Bods

2012-01-31T14:19:00.003-10:00

OMG! Kim, Khloe, Kourtney Kardashian Go Topless

2012-01-31T14:06:00.002-10:00

Daring denim divas!

The Kardashian sisters go topless in a brand-new ad for their Kardashian Kollection denim collection.

"Kourt, Khloe and I decided to go natural," Kim, 31, wrote on her blog Monday of the sexy shot. As shot by photographer Nick Saglimendi, the famous reality TV sisters (including Kourtney, 32, and Khloe, 27) pose dramatically "in only our favorite jeans," Kim explained. (Kourtney reclines on her back, her legs intertwined with Kim, who sits on a platform; similarly topless Khloe leans against a wall.)

Kim is very satisfied with the results. "I think it's such a beautiful shot and Khloe and Kourtney both look so stunning!" she wrote.

WEKLY ONLINE

Family lost for 6 days found alive in Oregon forest

Sean Kingston - Party All Night (Sleep All Day) (Official Music Video)

Brad Pitt’s Secret to Waking Up the Kids

'Fear Factor' contestants told by NBC to shut up about canceled episode they starred in

Key Internet operator VeriSign hit by hackers

White House: No decision yet on end to combat in Afghanistan

White House: No decision yet on end to combat in Afghanistan

Obama may keep his job even if you lose yours

VeriSign, at Web's core, is hacked: What does it mean to you?

Fla. teenage crash survivor won't be deported

'Disgusted beyond belief': Parents shaken by ex-Calif. teacher's molestation charges

That embarrassing Christina Aguilera photo that has everyone talking-cringing

Twilight” star Ashley Greene is on the cover of Lucky Magazine this month

Who is the most desirable woman of 2012?

Kelly Clarkson to sing national anthem at this year's Super Bowl

What a $50,000 Ticket to P. Diddy's Grammy Party Buys You

Romney wins Florida GOP primary, Fox News projects

5 Reasons One Parent Should Stay at Home

America's 10 "Youngest" Cities

How Is Your City Doing? Just as with individuals, lifestyle choices have a big impact on a city's age, says RealAge cofounder Michael F. Roizen, MD. "Stress, smoking, ... more

Paula Abdul and Nicole Scherzinger gone from 'X Factor'? Good!

Celine Dion Suffers Wardrobe Malfunction In Jamaica

Kim, Kourtney & Khloe Kardashian Go Topless In New Jeans Ad (PHOTO)

Lamar Odom Confesses To Khloe Kardashian He's Jealous Kourtney Is Pregnant

Kardashians' Hot Bikini Bods

OMG! Kim, Khloe, Kourtney Kardashian Go Topless

How Is Your City Doing?
Just as with individuals, lifestyle choices have a big impact on a city's age, says RealAge cofounder Michael F. Roizen, MD. "Stress, smoking, ... more