VERY,VERY HOT READS, I Would Read The News In This Thread This Thead Is To post Any Thing Ye Want About The News,,NEWS WAS MOVED,READ MY FIRST POS...

http://www.first10minutes.com/

 

Hackers' hospital bot army

p2p news / p2pnet: Some 50,000 hospital computers across the US were turned into a Zombie bot army controlled by 20-year-old California hacker Christopher Maxwell, says a federal indictment.

Maxwell, from Vacaville, and two unidentified juveniles, pulled in some $100,000 in the process, court documents state, says the Seattle Times.

Maxwell, who isn't in custody, will make his first appearance in US District Court in Seattle on February 23 while the juveniles are being charged in other undisclosed jurisdictions, says the story.

He had affiliate relationships with several mainstream adware companies and then, "simply created a program instructing his infected computers, or 'bots,' to download the adware," says the ", going on:

"The bots then 'phoned home' to the adware company, which credits the hacker's account, unaware that he hasn't gotten the computer owner's permission.

"Since 2004, Maxwell earned more on botnets than he did at his Wal-Mart job, according to court papers."

He's been charged with one count of conspiracy to intentionally damage a protected computer and with one count of intentional computer damage that interferes with medical treatment, says the story, adding:

"The crimes carry a sentence of up to 10 years in prison, a $250,000 fine and restitution."

Also See:
Seattle Times - 3 accused of inducing ill effects on computers at local hospital, February 1, 2006

(Sunday 12th February 2006)
http://p2pnet.net/story/7900

 

Boycott Google Day,

p2p news / p2pnet: Tomorrow may be Valentines Day for some people, but for others it's Boycott Google Day.

Because February 14 is also the day Students for a Free Tibet have chosen to focus world attention on Google's passionate love affair with China, home of the non-free.

"Kissing up to the Chinese government, Google has custom-built a search engine for China and Tibet that blocks access to information sensitive to the Chinese authorities including 'human rights,' 'democracy,' and 'freedom,' says the No Luv 4 Google site,"

To further underscore Google's decision to support China in pursuit of the Almighty Dollar, Dynamic Internet Technology ceo Bill Xia recently revealed China is using blacklists as part of its dedicated China censorship program.

"We need to tell Google - and other corporations operating in China, Tibet and other Chinese-occupied territories - that there are higher principles than the profit motive and desire to appease the Chinese government," says Boycott Google.

Are you wondering: why pick on Google?" – asks the boycott page, going on, "What about Yahoo!, Microsoft and other technology companies cozying up to the Chinese authorities? We're outraged at their actions too - particularly the news that Yahoo! gave the Chinese government information on another Chinese dissident who was sentenced to 8 years in prison for the 'crime' of supporting democracy.

Take action and tell them you have NO LUV for them either, suggests No Luv 4 Google.

And don't forget Microsoft or Cisco.

Google, riding high on its enormous wealth, is forgetting how it got to be so rich and that many of its investors are ordinary people who bought shares because they truly believed in Google the Good.

It would be interesting to see what would happen if there was an investors' revolt.

For now, go here for a list of the people who've signed up so far, here to sign up yourself and here for helpful materials if you're planning to organize a No Luv 4 Google protest or event in your community.
http://p2pnet.net/story/7902

 

Problems with Intel Macs

p2p news / p2pnet: Mac enthusiast site ConsumerMachine reported that in playing video on Apple's Front Row media browser, some Intel iMacs showed random horizontal lines, ghosting, video tearing and other problems, said CRN.

Apple is, "aware of this issue and is looking into it," the company said in an email. "If a customer has any technical issues, they should contact AppleCare."

ConsumerMachine says reports that new CTO intel iMacs are shipping with a third build, 8G1172, are appearing.

"This build seems to be devoid of any software problems causing graphical glitches on 8G1171 machines," it says. "More than likely, 8G1172 was a rapidly released precautionary measure. If every machine shipping with 8G1171 was returned to Apple as defective, it would result in massive consumer dissatisfaction and more importantly for Apple lost revenue as Apple faced consumers demanding returns.

"This will be followed by feeling of fear of being swindled for a lemon, promptly followed by a defensive 'No way. I want a refund.' As such, all new iMacs are probably going to be shipped with the fixed build 8G11712. Therefore, as far as Apple is concerned, there is no 'video problem' in new iMacs as of now. Only a very certain and small sample of machines will have the problem (those that shipped with 8G1171)."

So, wonders ConsumerMachine, "where is 8G1172 for the rest of us?" - adding:

"I think most of us would be happy if Apple released a small statement to the effect of: 'Hey, if you happened to get one of those buggy iMacs, it's a simple software problem. We'll be releasing a software update in a few weeks that will take care of it. Thanks for being patient.' That small gesture would do a lot to ease some of our minds and would also do wonders for Apple's image.

"Otherwise, Apple really needs to pay every 8G1171 user for beta testing. As far as I can tell, the posters on Apple's discussion board and this site were the ones to find the problem and diagnose its cause. We were also one of the first to buy the new iMacs: early adopters and thus likely some of Apple's biggest supporters.

"Throw us a friggin' bone, Steve."

 

Joining hands with China,

p2p news / p2pnet: Recently, Yahoo and Microsoft cynically, "urged the US government to act at an international level to stop foreign governments censoring the online content that their citizens can view and access".

Now, the two companies, together with Google and Cisco, will, "come under unprecedented grilling in Congress" for, "joining hands with China to censor the Internet, despite the proud American tradition of free speech," says Agence France-Press.

On Wednesday, the four are slated to appear before a House of Representatives human rights panel, "which summoned them following public outcry over their compliance with Beijing," says AFP.

By, "complying with China's demand for censorship" to, "enter the booming Chinese market," some of top US Net firms have in essence have become, "a megaphone for communist propaganda and a tool for controlling public opinion," the story has co-chair Chris Smith saying.

"The Republican Representative from New Jersey, who heads the House subcommittee on global human rights and international operations, is drafting legislation imposing curbs on Internet companies seeking to expand into China," says AFP.

State Department officials have also been summoned to explain Washington's stand on the issue at the one-day hearing.'

But, adds AFP, "laws regulating the activities of Internet companies should only be a last resort, cautioned media watchdog Reporters Without Borders, suggesting instead a code of ethics that upholds freedom of expression.

"For example, if US companies sell Internet censorship software to repressive states, they would have to incorporate a list of "protected" keywords rendered technically impossible to censor, said Lucie Morillon, the group's Washington director."

Meanwhile, a Valentine Day No Luv 4 Google boycott has been launched for tomorrow - February 14..
http://p2pnet.net/story/7904

 

Downloading TV shows in Oz

p2p news view / p2pnet: Everwood. It's not a cool program. It probably never was intended to be a cool program. I mean come on. A family drama, with scripts written by a team of writers, and accomplished actors? It would never work. Would people watch a program with no one getting voted off every week?

Australia's Nine Network, the home of Survivor, The Apprentice, 60 Minutes, Dr Phil, and game shows such as Temptation and Family Feud, certainly never had faith in it. They waited nearly three years from its first US screening before they started showing it in Australia. And when they did screen it, they BURIED it on Saturday afternoon.

Then something strange happened. Hundreds of thousands of Australians started watching the program and as the number of viewers increased in 2005, Nine did the unexpected (or was it the expected?) - they simply yanked the program off their schedule.

No announcement. No explanation. Then after a break of many months, recently the program reappeared on weekdays at 10am every day! Fantastic - Everwood fans could watch the program again. Except if they had the temerity to have a job and go to work on weekdays. Remember, in Australia it's still illegal to time shift TV programs by recording them and watching them at a later time, although it's safe to say almost all viewers do .

Now Everwood has been yanked off the schedule. Again. For those curious - the last episode shown in Australia was "The Birds & the Batteries" - episode 5 of season 3. The episode aired in the US in October 2004. There is no word on when the series will re-appear.

The Everwood story is a typical story as Australian fans of The West Wing, Enterprise and host of other programs will attest to.

No wonder internet savvy Australian TV viewers are downloading TV programs in unprecedented numbers. The issue has even started receiving publicity in the Australian mainstream media.

You'd think after watching the recording industry spend millions of dollars on the Kazaa case, in a futile attempt to prop up outdated business models, the Australian television industry would have learned a lesson or two from the Australian recording industry. But seemingly, that's not the case - witness the quote in the above article from Ten's David Mott: "We don't condone piracy and we support the US networks' efforts to prevent it".

That quote could have come straight from the recording industry.

A final thought for copyright holders: imagine the revenue stream if a small percentage of Everwood's Saturday viewers would have been willing to spend just a few dollars to purchase a stream or download of that program, so that they wouldn't have to wait years to see what happens to their favourite characters.

Instead, they've been forced to turn to the torrents.

Talk about creating an environment encouraging piracy and then getting upset when the piracy actually takes place!

Alex Malik - p2pnet
[Malik is a lawyer, music industry commentator and academic researcher at the University of Technology in Sydney.]

(Monday 13th February 2006)
http://p2pnet.net/story/7905

 

Net suicides in Japan

p2p news / p2pnet: A total of nine people were found dead in cars and, "All nine died of carbon monoxide poisoning after lighting charcoal burners inside the sealed vehicles," said a Japan Times story in 2004.

It went on, "Authorities are hesitant to crack down on the sites because doing so would infringe on people's freedom of expression. Some have said the sites serve to prevent suicides by providing a forum for people to discuss their problems.

"The nine apparently all met through a Web site run by a 34-year-old woman. The suicide-related sections of her site have since been shut down."

Now, the number of Japanese who killed themselves in online suicide pacts rose sharply last year, says the BBC, going on:

"Increasing numbers of young people in Japan are feeling alienated by modern life. Several thousand are termed 'hikikomori' - recluses who never leave their room, finding entertainment only on the internet."

Suicide is widely discussed topic on many sites in Japan, "and there's even a guidebook to the best places to kill yourself," says the story.

Police statistics showed 34 internet-arranged suicide pacts were recorded last year, says the story, adding:

"But the number of cases may now be falling. Twenty of the 34 cases took place in the first three months of last year, before internet service providers started working with the authorities to tackle the problem.

"The suicide pacts still make up a relatively small proportion of Japan's suicides. More than 34,000 Japanese took their own lives in 2003, according to the National Police Agency - an increase of more than 7% from the previous year."
http://p2pnet.net/story/7906

 

Gay rights win in Warcraft

p2p news / p2pnet: Blizzard has been forced to apologise for threatening to expel a Warcraft player for advertising a gay-friendly guild.

The warning, "should never have been issued," it says.

Troubles arose when Sara Andrews, with a Level 60 mage called Shimmre on the Shadow Moon server, said Oz, the guild she helps to run, was friendly to gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people.

"The credo of OZ is one of peace and unity without judgments or intolerance of others, whatever they may be," says the Oz page.

"The idea for OZ sprang from the mind of our Guild Master, also known as the Wizard of OZ, Shimmre. She, along with others, were tired of being in guilds where the all too old and tired phrase 'That's so gay' was used all too frequently and where gay jokes and bashes seemed all too prevalent. There just did not seem to be a place for the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender (GLBT) community to fit in when it came to guilds in the game. So Shimmre decided to change that. But during the course of the development of the guild it was decided that the guild would not be exclusively GLBT. We did not want to send the message that it seemed so many others were sending us...one of unacceptance and intolerance of others. So the rules changed. OZ became a guild where GLBT were accepted openly and without prejudice or fear of being the brunt of jokes made at their expense and where they could be open and honest about who they were without the fear of rejection. However, we also decided, in the true spirit of our ideals, to accept anyone and everyone with the one rule that they must be open minded, kind and leave all their judgments at the doors to OZ.

"And so, OZ was formed. We are still a relatively new guild and still somewhat small compared to others, but we are growing every day. With 100 members currently we're well on our way to becoming a great guild. This site is here to inform our members about OZ news, events, contests and well...pretty much everything pertaining to OZ and to let others know about us and who we are in the interest of reaching other new recruits. So stay a while and learn a little about OZ."

On January 14, "We have reviewed this case and have determined that advertising for a guild based on Sexual Orientation is not appropriate for the World of Warcraft," said a/c admin Karliss.

"Yes, but I willl continue to advertise for my glbt friendly guild because it's NOT against the policy," responded Shimmre, "and if I get reported again by some bigot that doesn't like seeing a glbt friendly guild advertised, and I get my account suspend. . . we'll have SERIOUS problems. Therefore, I need to be assured that this will not happen. . . so that I can reassure my guildmates that they will not be in trouble for recruiting for my glbt friendly guild. I refuse to recruit any other way, because there are WAY too many people on WoW that use REAL anti-gay terms and I do not want those people in my guild."

But, "Hi Sara," emailed Thor Biafore, head of Blizzard customer service worldwide.

"I'd like to thank you for bringing your recent concerns to our attention, and to extend our apologies for any inconvenience this has caused you or your guild.

"The action that was taken by our customer service representative was an unfortunate interpretation of our current policies, which are currently under review. This was ultimately escalated to my attention,

and after reviewing all the details, I have had the warning removed from your account.

"Please accept our apologies for the way our staff characterized your conduct, and rest assured that your account will not be penalized in any way for this occurrence."

(Monday 13th February 2006)
http://p2pnet.net/story/7908

 

Plextor releases PX-760 series 18X Dual Format DVD burners
Posted by Dan Bell on 13 February 2006 - 14:41 - Source: Plextor

dss311 used our news submit to tell us about the release of the latest writers in the Plextor lineup. Plextor has put up a news release announcing the PX-760A and PX-760SA. As stated from the Plextor website: "The Premium PX-760 series are the World's fastest DVD-ReWriters to date and include the ATAPI/IDE PX-760A and the Serial ATA PX-760SA. They are both capable of 18x DVD+/-R and 10x DVD+R DL speeds and come with a comprehensive package of high-end features."

Write & Read speed

Write
DVD+R 18x
DVD+R DL 10x
DVD-R 18x
DVD-R DL 6x
DVD+RW 8x
DVD-RW 6x
CD-R 48x
CD-RW 24x

Read
DVD-ROM 16x
CD-ROM 48x

Technical Specifications

Interface IDE/ATAPI
Data buffer 2 MB
Access Time <100ms (CD); <150ms (DVD)
MTBF 60 000h
Disc Loading Tray (50.000 times)
Bezel replaceable Yes, black bezel included in retail version for FREE!
Digital Audio Yes, S/P DIF output
Dimensions 146 x 41,3 x 170 mm
Weight < 1kg
Warranty 2 year Fast Warranty Service (in EU, Norway and Switzerland: Collect & Return)
1 year in other countries

More information can be found by visiting the Plextor website.
http://www.plextor-europe.com/products/px-760a.asp?choice=PX-760A

 

Yahoo grapples with online rights

By Tom Zeller Jr.
The New York Times
Published: February 12, 2006, 9:55 PM PST

In advance of what could be harsh congressional questioning this week, Yahoo plans to issue a statement Monday outlining its belief in openness and freedom of speech--even when it is forced to violate those beliefs by laws in China.

Yahoo and three other technology companies are to testify Wednesday before a House human rights subcommittee about their business dealings in China.

"We are deeply concerned by efforts of governments to restrict and control open access to information and communication," an advance copy of the statement said. "We also firmly believe the continued presence and engagement of companies like Yahoo is a powerful force in promoting openness and reform."

In addition to pledging to work with industry, government and other groups to develop policies for doing business in restrictive countries, Yahoo, which censors the results on the Chinese version of its search engine to meet government demands, also said it would strive to make those restrictions apparent to users.

Yahoo's general counsel, Michael Callahan, will join executives from Google, Microsoft and Cisco before the House subcommittee on Africa, Global Human Rights and International Operations on Wednesday.

All four companies have come under fire for their dealings in China--from agreeing to censor their search or blogging tools to providing hardware that makes government surveillance of Internet users easier.

The Paris-based group Reporters Without Borders revealed on Wednesday that a Chinese division of Yahoo had provided information to authorities that contributed to the conviction in 2003 of Li Zhi, a former civil servant who had criticized local officials online. Li is serving eight years in prison.

It was the second disclosure of such an incident in the last six months. Callahan said the company welcomed the opportunity to discuss these issues with Congress.

"There is no question that complying with Chinese law in the way that's come to light has led to things that have caused our company to reflect hard on these issues," he said.
http://news.com.com/Yahoo+grapples+with+online+rights/2100-1028_3-6038434.html?tag=nefd.top

 

The Secret Cause of Flame Wars

By Stephen Leahy | Also by this reporter
02:00 AM Feb, 13, 2006

"Don't work too hard," wrote a colleague in an e-mail today. Was she sincere or sarcastic? I think I know (sarcastic), but I'm probably wrong.

According to recent research published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, I've only a 50-50 chance of ascertaining the tone of any e-mail message. The study also shows that people think they've correctly interpreted the tone of e-mails they receive 90 percent of the time.

"That's how flame wars get started," says psychologist Nicholas Epley of the University of Chicago, who conducted the research with Justin Kruger of New York University. "People in our study were convinced they've accurately understood the tone of an e-mail message when in fact their odds are no better than chance," says Epley.

The researchers took 30 pairs of undergraduate students and gave each one a list of 20 statements about topics like campus food or the weather. Assuming either a serious or sarcastic tone, one member of each pair e-mailed the statements to his or her partner. The partners then guessed the intended tone and indicated how confident they were in their answers.

Those who sent the messages predicted that nearly 80 percent of the time their partners would correctly interpret the tone. In fact the recipients got it right just over 50 percent of the time.

"People often think the tone or emotion in their messages is obvious because they 'hear' the tone they intend in their head as they write," Epley explains.

At the same time, those reading messages unconsciously interpret them based on their current mood, stereotypes and expectations. Despite this, the research subjects thought they accurately interpreted the messages nine out of 10 times.

The reason for this is egocentrism, or the difficulty some people have detaching themselves from their own perspective, says Epley. In other words, people aren't that good at imagining how a message might be understood from another person's perspective.

"E-mail is very easy to misinterpret, which not only triggers flame wars but lots of litigation," says Nancy Flynn, executive director of the e-Policy Institute and author of guidebooks E-Mail Rules and Instant Messaging Rules. Many companies battle workplace lawsuits triggered by employee e-mail, according to Flynn.

S"People write absolutely, incredibly stupid things in company e-mails," said Flynn.

http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,70179-0.html?tw=wn_index_2

 

Half-Life 2 turning to episodic installments

2/12/2006 6:20:41 PM, by Ken "Caesar" Fisher

The Half-Life franchise is moving to an episodic release schedule according to comments from Valve's Doug Lombardi. Lombardi has revealed that Half-Life 2: Aftermath has been renamed to Half-Life 2: Episode One. Half-Life 2 was released in late 2004 to critical acclaim (review), and the sequel to the title—the aforementioned Aftermath— has been expected for quite some time. While Valve released the (very cool) Lost Coast add-on/technology preview last fall, gamer hopes for a holiday release of Aftermath never materialized. To be sure, Valve has a reputation for being slow in delivering the goods, but whether or not this is a good thing largely depends on who you ask. Given the outstanding quality of their games, it's hard for many to find fault.

What does it mean to say that Half-Life 2 is turning episodic? While Valve has given no details, a few things can be easily surmised. First, episodic content means more frequent content, but less of it in each installment. That much is obvious. But how much, and for what? SiN Episodes, another episodic title coming soon, is expected to sell for $20-$25, and feature at least 6 hours of game play. While none of this is official, it is also believed that there will be new episodes every 9-12 months, hence the term "episodic." Half-Life 2 may be heading in the same direction.

For both episodic games, the method of distribution will be Steam, Valve's controversial online distribution service. SiN Episodes will not be available via retail at all, but it is unclear what will happen with the Half-Life 2 offerings, as there were reports that Valve's next title would appear in retail stores on April 24. The transition to episodic content likely means that these plans are off.

For Valve, the move will likely pay off. While a small segment of gamers are suspicious of anything involving Steam, most Half-Life 2 fans are so engrossed in the story arc that episodic content will be warmly received as sweet, sweet relief from the pain of waiting. There are concerns, however. One person with ties to a retail gaming outlet told me that there are worries that game developers could end up approaching their games the way complex stories are treated by television: the story arc may take longer to develop, while actual game play may be dominated by non story-arc features. Such are the challenges that those experimenting with the release strategy will need to face.
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060212-6164.html

 

More details leak about Playstation 3

2/12/2006 4:52:14 PM, by Jeremy Reimer

Last month, Sony shipped Playstation 3 development kits to a select group of third party game companies. Despite a tight veil of secrecy courtesy of signed non-disclosure agreements, some tidbits have leaked out from various anonymous sources.

The first, not-so-surprising revelation is that the development kits do not look anything like the proposed PS3 hardware. Rather, they are contained in largish towers, similar in size to typical desktop PCs. This was the same for the early PS2 dev kits, and the first Xbox 360 development kits were actually re-branded Apple G5 towers, so this is not a huge surprise. More interesting is the fact that the sleek, curved PS3 models that have been demonstrated at various trade shows are actually empty shells, and it is not clear how Sony will manage to squeeze all the required components into the advertised case. Some developers have concluded that the existing case does not even have room for a 2.5 inch hard drive, suggesting that Sony will be forced to bump the dimensions of the box somewhat before release.

The controller on the dev kits is apparently a standard USB gamepad, and developers are writing games with the assumption that the control scheme will remain unchanged from the PS2's DualShock configuration. The word is that Sony is changing the look of the controller after receiving massive negative feedback over their original "boomerang" concept design.

As far as the hardware itself, developers are suggesting that it is on par or slightly more powerful than the Xbox 360. This does not come as a huge surprise to those of us who have studied the released hardware specifications of both consoles, but it does put a slight damper on the enthusiasm generated by Sony PR. One thing that has been lost, perhaps not forever but at least from the first generation of PS3 games, is the boast that developers would be able to generate killer visuals at higher resolutions than the Xbox 360 was able to handle:

"Sony wanted 1080p, but we're working at 720p and 1080i, same as on the Xbox 360. Even with [final hardware] in mind, reaching good frame rates at 1080p with next-gen graphics is almost impossible. Instead many developers, ourselves included, are reworking so they run at 720p. PS3's output takes care of upscaling it - so no native 1080p, but it still looks killer."

The hardware does appear to handle slightly more objects and special effects simultaneously than the Xbox 360, but the advantages are not overwhelming, and depend largely on the quality of the developer:

"Unlike Xbox and PS2, where Xbox had a host of built-in effects that were a generation ahead of PS2, the Xbox 360 and PS3 are same-generation machines. One doesn't have additional effects over the other - 360 can do the same effects, just not as many of them simultaneously and with less geometry [because of the speed difference], but memory bottlenecks can kill part of the PS3 speed advantage anyway... the overall visual difference it makes will depend a lot on the developer's skill, and how much time and money the publisher spends on a game."

That last sentence may end up being the most important, if my predictions are correct. Overall, the PS3 is shaping up to be a solid piece of gaming hardware, but not significantly more powerful than the Xbox 360. The differences may end up being masked by the desire by game publishers to ship cross-platform code. In the end, the battle for next-gen console supremacy may come down to a fight between Sony and Microsoft to ship the best exclusive titles. And maybe, if we're really lucky, a knock-down, drag-out price war.
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060212-6162.html

 

DVDFab Decrypter 2.9.7.2 (02/12/2006)


DVDFab Decrypter is a simple version of DVDFab Express. It copies entire DVD movie to hard disk, and removes all the protections (CSS, RC, RCE, APS, UOPs and Sony ARccOS) while copying.

http://www.dvdidle.net/download/DVDFabDecrypter29.exe

 

Road-Ready Night Vision At Last

By Bruce Gain | Also by this reporter
02:00 AM Feb, 13, 2006

MUNICH, Germany -- Driving at night down a dark and isolated stretch of road off the Autobahn, one could easily believe there isn't another soul within miles: The windshield view shows only a few yards of barren road lined with looming trees and dense shrubs. But a quick glance at the monitor in the center of the dashboard reveals the brightly illuminated image of a man moving out from behind a bush on the side of the road, beyond the ambit of the headlights, where I would never have seen him.

Mercedes and BMW hope to make night driving safer with dashboard monitors that expose what the naked eye is unable to see lurking in the dark. During exclusive test drives near the carmakers' headquarters in Germany, Wired News experienced the night-drive systems firsthand in the new Mercedes-Benz S-Class and the BMW 7 Series. The sedans are set to launch in the United States this year.

Relying on a monitor to see what was beyond the scope of the headlights did not feel like the Blade Runner experience I had anticipated. I quickly learned how to use the two systems to ward off collision courses with the pedestrians, animals or objects that all too often make nighttime driving hazardous.

Indeed, helping to prevent thousands of deaths each year attributed directly or indirectly to night-driving hazards is the raison d'etre of the new night-vision systems, Mercedes and BMW say. According to a 2003 U.S. Department of Transportation study, more than 20 percent of fatal accidents occurred between midnight and 6:00 a.m., which accounts for only 2.4 percent of traffic volume during a 24-hour period. About half of all fatal pedestrian accidents also occur at night, the study said, when fewer people are out and about.

Video
click to see video
Alone in the Dark?
Download video footage of the Mercedes night vision in action.
But while Mercedes and BMW agree that night-vision systems can save lives, the two carmakers have diverging philosophies about how nighttime images should be displayed. Mercedes uses near-infrared sensors in its S-Class, while BMW's 7 Series uses a far-infrared technology.

BMW's system scans up to 984 feet in front of the car at a 12- to 18-degree angle. It uses a CMOS-based sensor to process the images using algorithms that detect the heat emitted by objects outside the car. The warmer the object, the brighter the image.

With BMW's infrared camera, pedestrians or animals that often pose invisible, animate hazards on the side or in the middle of the road appear as very bright, ghostlike images on the monitor, positioned in the center of the dashboard. House frames resemble X-ray-like images and tires -- the hottest components of a car -- are fuzzy white. Colder objects, such as metal lampposts or pavement, appear on the screen less vividly.

The system proved its worth on that test drive down the pitch-black road -- roadside pedestrians and cyclists appeared on the monitor that I would not have seen without the system. Artur Russ, a BMW engineer who helped head the system's design efforts, said spotting such mobile and living hazards is the main purpose of the system.

But besides showing very bright images of people and animals, BMW's night vision system also does a reasonably good job of illuminating the entire landscape. While barreling along at high speeds on the Autobahn, for example, I was able to make out the turns ahead before I could see them with the high beams.

Mercedes' S-Class night-vision drive system, on the other hand, is less useful for long-range navigation, but has its advantages over the BMW design.

The Mercedes technology uses a near-infrared camera to scan and process nighttime images and offers a better resolution compared to BMW's system. But its maximum projection distance is only 492 feet. Unlike BMW's thermal detection camera, the Mercedes S-Class' night-vision system does not emphasize living objects, such as people or animals, in bright whites, but images are generally crisper and clearer.

"A far-infrared system depends on the heat radiated by an object, which can vary a great deal," said Juergen Seekircher, a Mercedes development engineer involved in the sensor technologies research. "Cold objects or objects with the same temperature as their surroundings, such as obstacles in the road or dead animals cannot be picked up by a far-infrared system. With near-infrared systems, the illumination is not dependent on environmental conditions and objects are therefore significantly more visible."

With the Mercedes system, images in front of the car appear on the display with roughly the same clarity as shown by the car's high beams. This extended visibility came in handy when I was driving fast on the Autobahn and couldn't switch on the high beams because cars were ahead of me. The display is also conveniently located just behind the steering wheel near the speedometer, so little effort was needed to glance down to see what was ahead beyond the reach of the headlights.



Whether consumers in the United States will bite and invest a couple thousand more dollars for either system remains to be seen. The price tags of the S-Class or 7 Series can total over $100,000, which buys a bundle of expensive driver-interface electronics for navigation, driving performance and entertainment options.

Mercedes and BMW's system debuts also follow unsuccessful attempts to introduce night vision in the U.S. market by Cadillac and Toyota, which still offers the option in its Lexus model.

According to Russ, Cadillac's system, which General Motors introduced in its 2000 Cadillac models but no longer offers, was debuted before the technology was ready, and suffered from glitches and poor resolution.

The Lexus system was also launched too soon and has little penetration in the United States, Russ said. Lexus' night vision sounds audible warnings that are too often false positives of inert objects, such as trees on the side of the road, and is often seen as more of a distraction, Russ said.

Meanwhile, audible alarms warning of people, animals or other hazards will likely be integrated in future iterations of the BMW system. While overcoming Toyota's problem with false alarms, Russ said, BMW hopes to tweak the algorithms of the system's sensors and make other improvements so the alarm will only go off when necessary. An audible warning will direct drivers to look at the screen only when a cow or deer really has strayed onto the highway hundreds of feet ahead. The system should also have controls so you can prepare it to detect animals near the road in the country and then scale it down to warn of only cyclists or pedestrians on the road in an urban area.

"There are some really smart algorithms that are, for example, especially designed to detect a human head, which is a particularly distinguishable feature," Russ said. "The system could tell you 'watch out for a human standing in the middle of the road,' for example."

Despite the advancements ushered in by the new luxury cars, the automobile windshield will not be replaced with an electronic night vision display anytime soon. Night-vision systems now and in the future will be designed to only make visible what car headlights can't illuminate, BMW's Russ says.

"We definitely don't want to encourage people to rely only the monitor," Russ said. "The human eye will remain superior."
http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,70182-0.html?tw=rss.index

 

CloneDVD Mobile 1.0.4.1


CloneDVD mobile converts your DVD movies quickly and easily into a format that your portable device (Sony PSP, Apple iPod Video, iAudio X5, Creative Labs ZEN Vision, etc) can play. You can also convert your DVDs to other file formats, such as DivX, XviD, AVI, MP4, etc.

Version 1.0.4.1: 2006 02 12
- New: Up to 300% (!) faster encoding with Apple iPod,
Sony PSP, Generic DivX and some other profiles
- New: Added profile for Sony Ericsson Phones (3GP)
- New: Added profile for Nokia Phones (3GP)
- New: Added profile for Motorola Phones (3G2)
- Change: Uses MPEG4 encoder instead of XVID by default
- Fix: Automatic update check could hang on some machines
- Fix: Wrong output size calculation with NTSC discs
- Fix: Bad quality with Windows Smartphone profile
- Fix: VOB output failed if file was bigger than 1 GByte
- Fix: Playback problems and bad quality with iAudio X5
- Updated lanuages
- Updated manuals

http://static.slysoft.com/SetupCloneDVDmobile.exe

 

Video: ENIAC: The public's first glimpse of a computer

Eighteen-thousand vacuum tubes and a box of light bulbs

On Valentine's Day sixty years ago, the world read the first newspaper accounts of a mysterious, new computing machine in Philadelphia. It wasn't the first computer ever made, but on that day, public awareness of modern technology took its first great post-war jump forward.
9 minutes 44 seconds Feb 13, 2006 4:00:00 AM



http://news.com.com/1606-2_3-6038193.html?part=rss&tag=6038193&subj=news

 

Antivirus Software
The New Virus Fighters
Today's antivirus programs have no trouble stopping familiar intruders, but how safe are you from the unknown? Our lab tests of ten contenders reveal a new Best Buy. more

The New Virus Fighters

Today's antivirus programs have no trouble stopping familiar intruders, but how safe are you from the unknown? Our tests of ten contenders reveal a new Best Buy.

Tony Bradley
From the March 2006 issue of PC World magazine
Posted Wednesday, January 25, 2006

« Previous Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next »

We have both good and bad news about the ongoing war against computer viruses. The good news: All the antivirus products we tested for this article were 100 percent successful at identifying and blocking recognized security threats. The bad news: Such utilities still can't completely protect you from new threats--and there are plenty of those around.


Advertisement




AV-Test, the German security firm with which PC World partnered for this story, says that 70 to 100 new threats are discovered each day. Though many of them are variants of existing threats, waiting even a few hours for your antivirus software vendor to release fixes for them exposes your computer and others to harmful infection. Plus, viruses aren't the only problem. Virus writers are also sending worms--which don't need a host file in order to spread--and other destructive programs such as Trojan horses to users as e-mail attachments.

"The Bagle author likes to do this," says senior security researcher Joe Stewart of LURHQ, a company that provides security consulting and managed security services. Because of such dangers, it's important that your antivirus application be able to recognize and remove not only viruses but other types of threats as well.

In this article:

Illustration by David Plunkert.

* Antivirus Tools Strike Back
* Our Antivirus Picks
* The Need for Speed
* Antivirus Alternative: Microsoft OneCare Live
* How We Tested Antivirus Software
* BitDefender's Malware Detection: Top-Notch (chart)

Antivirus Tools Strike Back

Antivirus software companies are adapting and upgrading their products in a number of ways. Frequently they now package traditional antivirus applications with other security components, such as antispyware tools and firewalls, to provide more-comprehensive protection; in some cases this extra functionality is baked into the antivirus product itself. Companies are also reducing the length of time it takes them to release signature updates, which individual antivirus utilities download and then use to recognize and destroy newly identified threats.


Advertisement




In addition, vendors are honing their products' heuristics, the mathematical algorithms that can spot new security threats based on their similarity to previously identified pieces of harmful code. "Heuristic scanning by antivirus software engines has shown some improvement over the past few years, with better detection and fewer false alarms," says Douglas Schweitzer, author of Securing the Network From Malicious Code: A Complete Guide to Defending Against Viruses, Worms, and Trojans. In false alarms--or false positives--an application wrongly flags a file as malware. This mistake at best wastes users' time and at worst causes them to delete benign files.

Companies are also using behavior-based detection to fight new threats that their products can't yet recognize through signature updates. This technology monitors the parts of your system that a malicious file might target, flags suspicious behavior, and stops it. The drawback associated with this approach is that the malware must already be active on your computer in order for behavior-based monitoring to detect it. For this reason, behavior-based detection works best as a supplemental layer of protection behind the virus-scanning engine, which ideally eliminates the threat before it can execute.

Stand-Alone Apps, Suites, and Free Tools

With these trends in mind, PC World aimed to learn which of today's antivirus products will best protect you against both known and unknown malware. We tested ten products, ranging in price from free to $50. To create a level playing field, we tested stand-alone antivirus apps where available and only the antivirus components of suites that offer other functions such as antispyware protection and network firewalls. Testing the suites with their nonvirus-oriented components enabled would have given them an unfair advantage over the stand-alone antivirus programs, to which you can add (and we recommend that you do add) the firewall and antispyware tools of your choice.

Among our test group, Alwil Software's Avast Home Edition 4.6, AntiVir PersonalEdition Classic 6.32, and Grisoft's AVG Free Edition 7.1 are stand-alone programs that cost nothing. F-Secure Anti-Virus 2006, Kaspersky Lab's Kaspersky Anti-Virus Personal 5.0, McAfee VirusScan 2006, and BitDefender 9 Standard are paid stand-alone applications. Panda Software's Panda Titanium 2006 Antivirus + Antispyware and Symantec's Norton AntiVirus 2006 both include antispyware tools. Trend Micro sells its antivirus tool only as part of the full PC-cillin Internet Security Suite 2006.

One product we didn't rate is Zone Labs' ZoneAlarm Antivirus, our 2005 World Class winner in the category. It combines Computer Associates' Vet Antivirus engine with Zone Labs' network firewall and OSFirewall, a behavior-based prevention technology that flags suspicious system behavior.

AV-Test did evaluate Computer Associates' scanning engine, which performed poorly and was the slowest to release signature updates for new threats. However, for this story AV-Test could not assess the effectiveness of Zone Labs' behavior-based malware prevention. Putting it to the test against AV-Test's malware collection would have taken months, as each file has to be active on the test system. Since the OSFirewall is integral to the Zone Labs product, we excluded the entire product. (Panda's product, which we did rate, also uses behavior-based detection.)

How We Tested

Overall, AV-Test ran five tests (see details on the methodology). First, it determined whether the products could detect 1518 "in the wild" malware samples--a published list of viruses and other threats identified by the WildList Organization as active in public circulation.

Second, it tested the programs' ability to detect non-WildList threats by using its own collection (or zoo) of 136,250 backdoor programs, Trojan horses, and bots (also known as zombies). The zoo includes active malware collected from customers, computer magazines, and honey pots, which are Internet-connected servers that researchers set up to lure malware. Since the WildList is published, is often out-of-date, and intentionally excludes non-self-replicating threats such as Trojan horses and backdoor software, AV-Test's zoo malware complements the WildList malware well.

A network firewall will detect backdoor apps, bots, and Trojan horses; but as with behavior-based detection, a firewall will notify you of trouble only once the threat is active on your PC. "Firewalls stop network traffic," says LURHQ's Stewart. "They might stop a Trojan from phoning home. They're not going to stop a Trojan from running [on your PC]," he says.

Third, AV-Test evaluated each product's heuristic capabilities. To do this, it looked at how well one- and two-month-old versions of the programs, which didn't have the later virus signatures installed, recognized malware that subsequently emerged. Thus, AV-Test determined the programs' ability to detect worms and backdoor software without the benefit of signature updates. Testing for worms and backdoor apps was appropriate because those were common and dangerous threats during the testing period, and brand-new viruses are hard to find, according to AV-Test.

Fourth, AV-Test examined each product's ability to clean up 110 macro viruses that attack Microsoft Office programs. And fifth, it compiled data on the average outbreak-response time by each antivirus software company to 16 outbreaks during eight months in 2005--a measure of how quickly the company deploys signature updates after new malware is identified.

To complete our testing, PC World timed how fast the various products conducted on-demand virus scans, and then we evaluated each product's ease of use, features, and tech support policies.

Next Page: Our Antivirus Picks


Our Antivirus Picks

Click here for full-size image. After the dust finally settled, BitDefender 9 Standard emerged as our Best Buy. It ranked in the top four on every performance measure, and it costs only $30. The $40 McAfee VirusScan 2006--with its relatively good heuristics performance and intuitive interface--came in second.

Click here for full-size image. Trend Micro's PC-cillin Internet Security Suite 2006, a descendant of our Best Buy in June 2004, finished ninth among the ten products. It performed poorly in the zoo and heuristics tests and is relatively expensive because it's available only as a full security suite. On the bright side, it had snappy outbreak-response times and offers a stellar user interface.

The three free programs came up short, too: AntiVir placed seventh, Avast ranked eighth, and AVG brought up the rear in tenth. Of course, for people who have no budget for antivirus software, any one of these products provides far more protection than simply forgoing an antivirus utility.

Fighting Malware We Know


Advertisement




At their default configurations and with up-to-date virus definitions in place, all of the products that AV-Test evaluated were 100 percent successful at detecting WildList viruses in real time and on demand, defined as when a user conducts a manual or scheduled scan of the computer.

The programs successfully detected and removed macro viruses, with a few exceptions. Avast failed to clean ten viruses, including two viruses that targeted files from PowerPoint versions 97 to 2003 and four viruses that targeted files from Word 6. Panda did not fully clean the two PowerPoint viruses, though the files were still operable. AntiVir failed to clean ten Word 6 viruses among others, and BitDefender missed two viruses that targeted files from Word versions 97 to 2003. These viruses aren't new, so today's products should be able to handle them.

The ability to catch WildList viruses is essential, since they're widely known; detecting the miscreants in AV-Test's zoo, however, is a somewhat different matter.

Kaspersky Anti-Virus Personal 5.0 was the only program we looked at that successfully detected all three types of zoo threats 100 percent of the time. F-Secure and Symantec were successful 97 percent of the time--still an excellent score.

At the other end of the spectrum, PC-cillin produced one of the worst results, detecting only 76 percent of zoo threats--this score includes 85 percent of bots, 82 percent of backdoor software, and 69 percent of Trojan horses. Trend Micro says that it chooses not to expend resources developing signature files for the malware contained in AV-Test's zoo because those threats have never affected its customers. We can't say for sure whether every threat in the zoo is relevant, but we would rather choose a product that detects 100 percent of that menagerie's beasts.

Fighting Malware We Don't Know

None of the products performed exceptionally well in our heuristic tests, proving that there is room for improvement in identifying new threats. In our tests of apps with one-month-old signatures, BitDefender performed the best, detecting 43 percent of worms and 57 percent of backdoor programs. McAfee came in a close second, catching 41 percent of worms and 55 percent of backdoor software. F-Secure and Kaspersky finished close behind, catching more than 32 percent of worms and and 53 percent of backdoor malware each. (AV-Test says that a 50 percent detection rate is very good.) In our tests of apps with two-month-old signatures, all programs did more poorly.

PC-cillin again performed the worst. Its scanner with one-month-old definitions caught just 5 percent of worms and 7 percent of backdoor software. Trend Micro feels that the problems caused by heuristics--in particular, with its potential for false positives--outweigh the benefits. As a result, the company chooses to place less emphasis on developing heuristics.

Next Page: The Need for Speed


The Need for Speed

Click here for full-size image. We tested the products for two kinds of speed: how fast they completed an on-demand virus scan and, more important, how swiftly the companies released signature updates for new malware outbreaks. The software that turned in the speediest scanning performance was Panda's, which blazed through the tests in an average time of 1 minute, 46 seconds. This was more than seven times faster than the slowest program, Avast, which came dragging in at the back of the pack with an average time of 13 minutes, 11 seconds.

When AV-Test evaluated the products' outbreak-response performance, all responded to incidents within 12 hours on average. Kaspersky had the fastest response time--from less than an hour to 2 hours. BitDefender and F-Secure were close behind at 2 to 4 hours. AntiVir and PC-cillin had response times of 4 to 6 hours; Panda took 6 to 8 hours; AVG, Avast, and McAfee took 8 to 10 hours, and Symantec taking the longest at 10 to 12 hours.

Features Vary, Slightly

Click here for full-size image. Some packages provide nice extras. All automatically and regularly download virus signature files and application updates. Most will let you set up full or customized scans on a defined schedule. Some, such as the free AVG, are relatively rigid, allowing only scheduled scans of predefined drives or file types. Unlike every other program here, Panda's doesn't permit you to set up a regularly scheduled scan; for that, you'll need the full Panda Platinum 2006 Internet Security Suite.

Many programs have adopted console screens--similar to Windows XP's SP2 Security Center--that provide a general overview of your PC's status. Symantec's Norton Protection Center, for example, tells you how secure your PC is when you perform common activities such as using e-mail or surfing the Web. In some ways, these consoles (McAfee's Security Center, for one) are platforms for blatant attempts by the companies to market their other products, but they can be useful for finding security holes.

Click here for full-size image. F-Secure and Panda provide breaking security news from their system tray icons. BitDefender puts a small window called the File Zone on your desktop to supply a running, graphical representation of the number of files that have been scanned in the past few minutes (you can turn the option off).

All of the products we tested come with e-mail technical support for the duration of the virus-software subscription (one year for the paid programs and indefinitely for the free ones). BitDefender, F-Secure, Kaspersky, Panda, and Trend Micro all offer free telephone support--on weekdays, at least. Symantec's phone support costs $30 per incident; McAfee charges $3 per minute for help. If you think you might wind up needing phone support, you should consider these prices when making your buying decision. One or two lengthy calls could add up to the price of the software.

The Convenience Factor

Click here for full-size image. Trend Micro's PC-cillin was the easiest product to use. It packs a lot of security information in an easy-to-understand interface. And while intuitive for novice users to navigate, it still provides the choices and settings that seasoned users would require to configure the software.

Alwil's Avast distinguishes itself with a unique and flashy main console--complete with customizable skins--that looks similar to some media players. The console provides the same information as those of other programs, but it hides some features behind surrounding icon buttons.


Advertisement




The interfaces on other programs are fairly basic. BitDefender's opening screen notifies users only whether virus protection and automatic updates are turned on. More-useful features are located in screens accessed on the left side of the window. They open intuitive toolbars that let you quickly access details; here you can specify whether you wish to receive security notifications or change the color scheme of the interface, for example.

Grisoft AVG's main window is practically useless. Its sparse collection of options--Scan Computer, Scan Selected Areas, and Check For Updates--underscore the limited nature of the software's features, and some configuration options remind you that certain tools are available only in the paid upgrade product, AVG Professional (which we couldn't test due to space and time constraints).

However, thanks to free products such as Grisoft's AVG Free Edition, you don't have to shell out any money to win the fight against known viruses. Though no antivirus package can completely protect your PC against unknown threats, choosing one of our top-rated products will at least give you the best protection you can get right now.

Next Page: Antivirus Alternative: Microsoft OneCare Live

Antivirus Alternative: Microsoft OneCare Live

Illustration by David Plunkert.Microsoft will soon join the ranks of companies that offer all-in-one security protection to consumers. We took a look at the public beta of Windows OneCare Live, a new subscription-based PC protection package. It is one of several Internet-based services that are available for download from the Windows Live Ideas page.

Click here for full-size image. OneCare Live is a collection of security tools and utilities that you can manage in a single interface. The security components currently consist of antivirus software and a firewall; Microsoft expects to add an antispyware application in a subsequent beta version. Other utilities in the set include a backup application and a tune-up routine that automates tasks such as disk defragmentation and disk cleanup.

Like most antivirus tools, OneCare Live lets you scan on demand or on a schedule, configure the files and folders you would like scanned, and exclude files from the scanning process. Currently, it performs no inbound or outbound e-mail scanning, and it scans instant messaging traffic only from MSN Messenger; the company says, however, that it plans to incorporate e-mail scanning and will consider additional IM client scanning later on. A layer of behavior-based protection monitors files for suspicious activities, such as modification of Registry keys. Our first scan took an acceptable 15-plus minutes.


Advertisement




OneCare's firewall, which monitors both inbound and outbound network traffic, is a beefed-up version of the Windows Firewall, which tracks only inbound traffic. Upon first use, OneCare asked us about software activity that it didn't recognize, such as an iTunes software update and Lotus Notes network activity. For the most part, it stayed out of our way so long as we kept up with security updates.

Installation was easy, though it required us to use Internet Explorer 6. (Checking for security updates necessitates using Internet Explorer 5 or later.) A Web-based wizard assessed our system to see whether it met the minimum requirements, as well as to spot possible software conflicts, before allowing us to install OneCare. Microsoft says that OneCare will check to make sure that you have no conflicting antivirus software running during installation, but it did not recognize the client version of Symantec's Norton AntiVirus Corporate Edition installed on our PC. However, a reader commenting on our Today @ PC World blog, reported that it did detect and prompt for the removal of the desktop version of Norton AntiVirus.

Microsoft hasn't set a price for the package, but a Purchase Now button indicates that OneCare won't be free forever.
-- Narasu Rebbapragada


Next Page: How We Tested Antivirus Software

How We Tested Antivirus Software

We tested stand-alone antivirus products where possible and only the antivirus scanning engines of products that had multiple security components. The PC World Rating is a weighted average of specifications (10 percent), price (10 percent), design (30 percent), and performance (50 percent).

Performance Tests Explained


Advertisement




AV-Test, a German security firm, evaluated how well the programs could detect 1518 WildList threats, and 136,250 threats from its own zoo of backdoors programs, bots, and Trojan horses. AV-Test evaluated each program's heuristics by using one-month-old and two-month old versions of the programs, which wouldn't have the benefits of subsequent malware signatures. In the one-month-old heuristic tests, AV-Test saw how well the programs could detect 244 backdoor programs and 37 worms. In the two-month-old heuristic tests, AV-Test saw how well the programs could detect 555 backdoor programs and 101 worms.

AV-Test evaluated how well the programs could detect and clean 110 macro viruses affecting Microsoft Office applications. AV-Test also compiled data on how quickly software companies released virus signatures for 16 new outbreaks over a period of eight months in 2005. PC World tested how quickly each program ran a system scan on a test set of files and folders.

Performance results are a weighted average of WildList tests (30 percent), zoo tests (15 percent), one-month-old heuristic tests (20 percent), two-month-old heuristic tests (10 percent), macro virus results (10 percent), outbreak-response-time tests (10 percent), and scan-speed tests (5 percent).
Tony Bradley is a network security consultant, and the lead writer for About.com's Internet/Network Security Web site. Narasu Rebbapragada is an associate editor for PC World.


http://pcworld.com/reviews/article/0,aid,124163,00.asp

 

i shouldn be on..im kinda drunk lol..im gonna do somthin stupid....

 

hey wait a second i got one for ya guys..how about this thingy from my blog..read it and tell me the worst strory ok,.#
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Which do you think is the worst?

some of the worst spyware storys youll hear






1)
(1/18/06)

Recently, I was attacked by malware for the first time, and I've had my own computer for nearly four years. I was actually sort of shocked because I've always credited myself with being well protected. Even when Microsoft came out with its antispyware product and most of my friends found out they were infected, I was clean.

When I booted my computer one day, I noticed a completely new icon on my desktop called SpyAxe. Since I hadn't knowingly installed it and no one else touches my computer, I got really irritated and immediately started to remove it, only to find this couldn't be done. The program reinstalled itself over and over again, and neither Spybot - Search & Destroy, Ad-Aware, AntiVir, nor Sygate Personal Firewall could do anything about it.

The most annoying part was that SpyAxe placed a small icon in my PC's system tray. One second it resembled a Microsoft logo (like the one that appears when you need to install OS updates), and the next it appeared as a red sign with a white X over it. Every few seconds, it popped up a text bubble saying my computer was infected and I should purchase SpyAxe to be completely protected. To tell the truth, I felt ridiculed by this malicious "antispyware" program. What kind of firm uses the same methods to get into your computer it's supposed to be stopping? I think it's low!

Well, I struggled with this for about a day before I came across a trial version of Spyware Doctor. That did the job and cleaned out the whole problem. I also have traced the problem to the source. It seems I picked up the trash when I visited a FAQ/serial/cheat site to find out how I could get through the game Commandos 2. So stay away from any sites that have to do with serials.

--Steffen
Hostelbro, Denmark


2)

After coming downstairs one morning, I sat down at the computer to do some work. As I prepared to log on with my user account (we run XP with five logons), I noticed my father's username was logged on. I paid no attention to this and logged on anyway. Soon after, he came downstairs and asked for my help, complaining that the computer was acting up when he logged in with his username. So I unhappily logged off and began to investigate.

As we logged on, Norton AntiVirus had just finished inspecting the computer but hadn't detected any threats. We began conversing about the specific problems he was having, when he pointed at the screen and said, "See for yourself." Swiveling around in my chair, I saw the computer screen and was horrified! A strange component had added itself to the notification area and was popping up, continuously repeating the message, "Your computer is infected with over 60 types of spyware! Click here to get expert tools to defend yourself." The Web site at which the pop-up claimed to originate was windowsupdate.net or something similar (I wasn't particularly interested in the actual URL at the time). Nevertheless, I started to sense that something was very wrong.

I opened Internet Explorer and, to my dismay, was redirected to the same site the pop-up had mentioned. The site also said our PC was being controlled by a remote computer. I almost died then, until I took a second to see if the site looked legitimate. After a bit of research, I came to the conclusion it wasn't and began scanning for spyware. During the next three hours, I threw everything I had at my computer. I tried AVG Anti-Virus, Microsoft Windows AntiSpyware, Ad-Aware, and SpyCatcher Express--all to no avail. As a last resort, I decided to use Spybot - Search & Destroy. It found multiple problems, and I was happy once again.

Then came the difficult task of trying to delete the evil files, as Spybot was unable to fix them immediately. It prompted me to run a scan on system start-up to see if it could fix the problem, and I of course obliged. The scan finished and everything seemed fine, but disaster struck once again--Spybot couldn't remove the files! I ran it and restarted a few more times, but I eventually gave up. I then wasted 30 minutes trying to delete the files manually, with my father going on in my ear about reformatting. Sadly, my attempts were unsuccessful.

Unwilling to accept defeat, I tried one last thing I had never done before: a system restore. I reset my computer to four days earlier and waited for the procedure to finish. Upon restarting, all my problems were gone! The object in the PC's notification area had vanished, the malicious files were gone, and Internet Explorer was back to its normal self--and even seemed a bit better.

So there you have it. Never refrain from trying something new--it could just save you a lot of bother.

--Andy
Cambs, U.K.

3)

It all started when we got the new desktop. The first thing I was going to do was download a few protective programs, as well as Service Pack 2. I downloaded the SP2 update and was planning to download multiple antispyware and antiviral programs. My father told me not to and said he would go out and purchase one himself. He came back with Norton Internet Security. It provided good protection, but my father complained about how the "extra settings" such as the e-mail scanner bothered him. So I downloaded AVG Anti-Virus and again tried to download Ad-Aware and Spybot - Search & Destroy. My father said no again and went off to buy an antispyware program. He returned with Webroot Spy Sweeper, which was just fine.

But after a while, my brother began toying around with LimeWire. I had strongly advised him against this, saying it would be the downfall of the computer, but he blew me off. I also suspected my father of viewing pornography on a daily basis (judging by the Web-surfing history) and this also worried me, because I knew you could contract a lot of bad software at these kinds of sites.

A few days later, I noticed Norton Internet Security flicking on and off and trying to run constant scans. When I let the scan run, it stopped before finishing. I found this weird. I suspected multiple strains of spyware were on the computer, but my father insisted I was just paranoid and that Spy Sweeper was working fine, again forbidding me from downloading other antispyware programs. After Spy Sweeper alerted me that potential threats were trying to install on my computer, I ran multiple scans. Each time I did, Spy Sweeper stopped after a few seconds. Soon, our Web browser slowed to a halt, as did everything else. Everybody complained to me as if it were my fault, although I had not been allowed to download additional protective programs. However, after days of everybody being fed up, I finally downloaded Spybot and Ad-Aware.

The former found hundreds of spyware keys but froze up in the middle of a scan. So I ran Ad-Aware, and the exact same thing happened. I tried removing the cookies and temporary files via my browser, but this option had been disabled, as had the Control Panel. I then ran Spybot and Ad-Aware again, to no avail. When I tried to click the Start menu, nothing happened. I tried clicking desktop icons, but again, nothing happened. The cursor moved but the screen was frozen; the wheel was turning, but the hamster was dead. After a bit, the computer decided to turn off and not turn back on. Ever. It died right there.

We still do not know how we got spyware, but I suspect it was my brother downloading hundreds of MP3s without bothering to use common sense

--Loki
New York, U.S.A.



4)

One day my computer started freezing up. I thought nothing of it. However, it kept freezing every day for about the same amount of time, not allowing me to do anything.

A month later, I got my phone bill. It turned out that while my computer was frozen, a nefarious program caused my PC to dial hundreds of long-distance numbers, leaving me with a bill that was more than $500 above normal. I ran a spyware scan and removed the dialing program, but it kept reinstalling itself. I went into the Registry and tried to disable it via the Task Manager, but nothing worked. The next month, I got another phone bill that was jacked up about $200 extra. After talking to the phone company, I got out of paying the bill, but this took much convincing and time.

I finally decided to reformat my hard drive and reinstall the OS. I also got rid of my dial-up connection in case the dialer ever returned.

--B.
Massachusetts, U.S.A.


5)

(11/30/05)

One day when I was browsing the Internet, I found this cute little game-creation program. I thought it would be kind of cool to make my own games and share them with friends. But, careless me, I just skimmed the EULA and skipped four or five sections. Apparently the EULA had information that disclosed the installation of 180search Assistant.

I proceeded to install the application, and it worked fine for about six hours. At that point, I decided to restart because of low system resources. As soon as I rebooted, I logged on and waited almost four minutes for my OS to load (XP had previously loaded within a minute tops). I was kind of confused about why a 1.8GHz machine would take so long to get going. When it appeared to be done, I decided to check my e-mail. When I opened Internet Explorer, a Jupiter-size pile of virus warnings blew up in my system tray.

Being the computer geek I am, I tried deleting the offender with every type of program I could get my hands on, including Norton AntiVirus, McAfee VirusScan, StopSign Virus Scanner, and Ad-Aware--you name it, I had it. Every time I loaded one of them up, I got a message saying, "A third-party program is trying to remove 180search Assistant without your permission." I was truly ticked by then, so I ran every single antiviral and antispyware program in unison. Finally, with dangerously low system resources and maybe 2K of 768MB RAM available, my posse of protective programs succeeded.

The main program that alerted me was McAfee VirusScan. It somehow detected a DLL that reinstalled itself in my Windows directory. McAfee wiped it out, and the rest of my arsenal bombarded the 180search Assistant, finally eradicating it.

--Brad
Wyoming, U.S.A.

6)


(10/26/05)

I consider myself relatively savvy when it comes to computers and protecting myself on the Web; I routinely update my adware- and spyware-removal programs, as well as Norton AntiVirus and SystemWorks. None of this mattered when I ran into trouble, though.

At the time, I had a cable-modem connection in my apartment. One day, the connection died, which is not entirely uncommon. I waited for it to return, but it never did. So I called tech support, and after doing some checks, they saw I had a red flag on my account and needed to call the company's Internet Policy Enforcement office. Upon doing so, I found out that, unbeknownst to me, my computer was sending massive amounts of spam; in response, my provider had shut down my connection. After I explained my story, they reinstated me but said it was my responsibility to stop the spamming, or they'd permanently cancel my account.

So I set about looking for the monster that was hiding somewhere in my system. After doing some investigating, I found it was a Trojan horse that had opened the door. I downloaded a firewall, which logged any transfers, and found the spam-mirroring program buried in my Windows folder. I had to unplug the modem and go into safe mode, but I finally was able to delete it.

Then I turned to the Trojan itself. Since my regular adware/spyware removers were unable to delete it, I downloaded Trojan eradicator after Trojan eradicator. After days of this, I was never able to find a program that was capable of deleting it! All I could do was keep my firewall active and pay close attention to its log. No further problems came of it, but, just to be safe, I reformatted my hard drive and reinstalled the OS.

To this day, though, I still don't feel completely safe from these beasts, especially considering how that one turned me into a spammer right under my nose!

--Evan
Virginia, U.S.A.

7)


I was using LimeWire to download programs that would help me turn my boring digital-camera pics into something on a Picasso level. As I entered a game room, I noticed a new toolbar pop up. I couldn't delete it manually, so I had to erase it via the Control Panel. From there, I noticed a few other unwanted programs, so I removed those as well and rebooted.

Upon restart, I went back to the Control Panel to make sure the programs were gone--but they weren't. At this point I tried to run some preventative programs, including Trend Micro HouseCall, Ad-Aware, Spybot, and Norton AntiVirus. The scans were turning up all kinds of results and told me some of the spyware components couldn't be fixed. I was going crazy, deleting what I thought was causing the problem and running scans over and over again.

Finally, I was in my shared file when I discovered more than 1,000 zipped files in there. I deleted them all, but more reappeared. For 24 hours I worked on this problem--scanning, deleting, and searching for help online. I found some potential programs and deleted a few Registry keys. But this cookie was smart: no matter what I did, the problems came back as soon as I rebooted. I found two files I couldn't delete no matter what I tried. Finally, I called a repair shop. They confirmed I had done all I could and that it was time for a reformat.

In all, solving this problem took me close to 48 hours, with only about 6 hours of sleep. Be careful what you download using file-sharing programs such as LimeWire, because you never know what you're really going to get.

--Darlene
Brandon, Manitoba, Canada

8)



I got the nefarious CWS! (That's CoolWebSearch to those not in the know.) It took me a week and a half to kill it.

First, I noticed my home page had been redirected to a questionable site of the nude variety. Then I noticed that if I mistyped a URL, I was redirected to a particular search engine. (I refuse to give the company the satisfaction of seeing its name in print here.) At this point I became very, very concerned, so I decided to open a folder I had created on my desktop titled Spyware War. I couldn't open it or any other folder, or even the My Computer icon. Now, I've heard of hijacking a PC before, but this was nasty! It was time to go into safe mode. I ran Ad-Aware from the aforementioned folder, and it found and removed 23 critical files.

"Whew," I sighed.

Reboot and go forth. Right?

Wrong. Twenty minutes later, it happened again! This was where the real education began. Before my ordeal was over, I had downloaded (from my brother's still-clean machine) and burned many antispyware programs to CD, including CWShredder, AboutBlaster, Spybot - Search & Destroy, Stinger, HijackThis, and a couple of custom process readers. After running all of them, I found I actually had four variants of the dreaded CoolWebSearch. I discovered this when I got a pop-up saying "Unable to start CWS." Apparently the variants were fighting each other.

My computer is now clean, I am much more educated, and I need a shower and a shave after my week and a half of late-night spyware wars.

--Paul
Indiana, U.S.A.

9)

My first experience with spyware was the most horrible. It happened about two years ago, when the concept of spyware and adware was still new.

I was browsing dating Web sites, when only a few seconds later I received an e-mail titled "Looking for a Date Samer?" At first, I thought it was just a strange coincidence, but later it started to freak me out, especially when I began to get weird e-mails containing my personal information that were geared toward my taste in products.

Even more bizarre was that my computer would start my dial-up connection in the middle of the night. I'd wake up to see myself connected to the Web.

Finally, I downloaded Ad-Aware, and all those problems became history.

--Samer
Beirut, Lebanon



-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------