UK tycoons slip in Forbes’ rich list – ShareCast

March 10th, 2011 by admin | No Comments | Filed in Social Networking, Uncategorized

UK tycoons slip in Forbes' rich list
LONDON (SHARECAST) – The Duke of Westminster has topped the UK rich list once again, but has slipped in the world rankings, as the number of tycoons from the emerging markets has surged.

Gerald Cavendish Grosvenor who owns a large portfolio of real estate properties through the Grosvenor Group has seen his net worth grow by $1bn to $13bn in 2011 and remains the richest Briton by some way, according to US magazine Forbes.

However, while the 59-year-old Duke was ranked the 29th richest billionaire in the world in 2009, he dropped to 45th and 57th in 2010 and 2011, respectively, despite his net worth increasing by $1bn both years.

Second in the UK list are David and Simon Reuben, the Mumbai-born UK real estate investors, with a fortune of $8bn collectively.

They are closely followed by retail big-shots Philip and Cristina Green, who own the trendy clothing chain Topshop through Arcadia Group, which has a network of more than 2,500 outlets. The couples net worth is approximately $7.2bn.

The overall list showed that some 214 billionaires have been added to the rich list over the last year, bringing the total number to 1,210, with a combined wealth of $4.5trn. The majority of the newcomers were from the Asia-Pacific region.

The region now has a record 332 billionaires, from 234 in 2010 and 130 in 2009: Sizzling stock markets are behind the surge, according to Forbes, with three quarters of Asias new entries obtaining the bulk of their fortunes from stakes in publicly traded companies, 25 of which have been public only since the start of 2010.

Mexican telecom mogul Carlos Slim Helu held on to the title of the worlds richest person for the second year running, adding $20.5bn to his net worth in the last 12 months to a total $74bn. This widened the gap between the number two on the list, Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates.

The latter has a fortune of $56bn, which he intends to give the majority of his wealth to charities over his lifetime through the Giving Pledge. US investor Warren Buffett, ranked third overall with a net worth of $50bn, is also part of a donation programme.

Not far behind is Lakshmi Mittal from ArcelorMittal, who ranks sixth overall. Profits at the steel-making giant jumped 18-fold to $2.9bn in 2010. Mittals fortune is worth $31.1bn.

A significant move up the list was seen by Facebook co-founder Mark Zuckerberg who skipped past many to rank number 52 in the world, up from 212th in 2010, as his fortune more than tripled from $4bn to $13.5bn.

The global phenomenon of social networking has resulted in six Facebook-related investors and board members making it onto the billionaire list.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

American Idol: Boys’ night as online voting debuts – CBS News

March 2nd, 2011 by admin | No Comments | Filed in Social Networking, Uncategorized
(CBS News)  This story was written by Caitlin Alexander in London.

The top 12 male contestants on “American Idol” gave solo performances Tuesday night to impress Season 10’s panel of new judges — as well as a new crowd of potential online voters.

Fox’s reality singing show has partnered with social networking giant Facebook to give fans the chance to vote for their favorites on the web.

According to the “American Idol” website, fans with a valid Facebook account can login and cast as many 50 single votes online. Fans can still also vote via text message or the more traditional phone call.

The top 12 boys came out in full force to snatch up the online votes. Contestant Casey Abrams was the last to hit the stage after a hospital stint this week for severe stomach pain. Bloggers praised his rendition of “Put a Spell on You” but also rated Jacob Lusk and James Durbin near the front of the pack.

“There was something highly entertaining about Casey’s passion,” said TV Squad blogger, Hilary Rothing. “Randy wants ‘more, more, more’ of Casey and I suspect America will too.”

Meanwhile, USA Today’s Idol Chatter blog qualified Lusk’s performance of the Burt Bacharach/Hal David hit “A House is Not a Home” as, “one of the finest vocal performances ever given by a male contestant on the show.”

The top 12 girls will get their chance to shine in Wednesday night’s episode.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

American Idol: Boys’ night as online voting debuts – CBS News

March 2nd, 2011 by admin | No Comments | Filed in Social Networking, Uncategorized
(CBS News)  This story was written by Caitlin Alexander in London.

The top 12 male contestants on “American Idol” gave solo performances Tuesday night to impress Season 10’s panel of new judges — as well as a new crowd of potential online voters.

Fox’s reality singing show has partnered with social networking giant Facebook to give fans the chance to vote for their favorites on the web.

According to the “American Idol” website, fans with a valid Facebook account can login and cast as many 50 single votes online. Fans can still also vote via text message or the more traditional phone call.

The top 12 boys came out in full force to snatch up the online votes. Contestant Casey Abrams was the last to hit the stage after a hospital stint this week for severe stomach pain. Bloggers praised his rendition of “Put a Spell on You” but also rated Jacob Lusk and James Durbin near the front of the pack.

“There was something highly entertaining about Casey’s passion,” said TV Squad blogger, Hilary Rothing. “Randy wants ‘more, more, more’ of Casey and I suspect America will too.”

Meanwhile, USA Today’s Idol Chatter blog qualified Lusk’s performance of the Burt Bacharach/Hal David hit “A House is Not a Home” as, “one of the finest vocal performances ever given by a male contestant on the show.”

The top 12 girls will get their chance to shine in Wednesday night’s episode.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

20 years of innovative Windows malware – CIO Australia

February 28th, 2011 by admin | No Comments | Filed in Business, Social Networking, Technology, Uncategorized

Windows PCs have been under siege for 20 years. What a difference those two decades make.

Back when Windows was young, viruses scampered from system to system, occasionally deleting files — which could almost always be retrieved — and putting up dialog boxes with inscrutable contents, like the numeral 1. Nowadays, Windows malware locks up your data and holds it for ransom. It manipulates your PC into launching attacks, mines files for credit card numbers and passwords, and sets nuclear centrifuges to whirl with wild abandon — nasty stuff.

[ Windows 7 is making huge inroads into business IT. But with it comes new security threats and security methods. InfoWorld's expert contributors show you how to secure the new OS in the "Windows 7 Security Deep Dive" PDF guide. ]

Along the way, Windows malware has spawned several billion-dollar antivirus companies, inspired enough articles to fill the Library of Alexandria, created jobs for many tens of thousands of security professionals, and caused more than half a billion king-size headaches.

These pesky programs didn’t morph from toddler to kickfighter overnight. There’s been a clear succession, with the means, methods, and goals changing definitively over time. As with any technology, innovative thinking points the way forward. Here’s a look at how ingenuity to nefarious ends has transformed Windows hacking into a multi-billion-dollar industry, and where the Windows mailware trail points to the future.

The early rogue’s gallery

Some of the most innovative and (still) pervasive malware techniques arrived at the dawn of Windows, with the years leading up to Windows 3.0 setting a strong foundation for Windows-specific malware to come.

Take, for example, VirDem, the first virus to infect an executable file. Ralf Burger created the virus in Germany in 1986 by sticking a self-replicating program at the front of a COM file and moving the original instructions to the end. This was soon followed by Cascade, which appeared in 1987 as the first virus that used encryption to disguise itself. Unfortunately, the encrypting routine was the same in all infected files, so scanners picked it up easily. #Fail.

GhostBalls (the code states proudly “Product of Iceland / Copyright © 1989″) combined two infection techniques, creating the first multipartite or blended threat virus. GhostBalls attaches itself to COM files and spreads by copying itself to other COM files, but it also looks for a diskette in the A: drive and, if found, copies a modified boot sector virus onto the diskette.

Overcoming Cascade’s congenital defect, in 1990 Mark Washburn came up with 1260, the first polymorphic virus. Polymorphic viruses change each time they’re encrypted — often altering the encrypting routine itself — making detection considerably more difficult.

Flying below the radar was the modus operandi of two other viruses launched in 1990, Frodo and Whale, which both became known as stealth viruses because they took great care to hide themselves. Frodo made Windows lie about the size of infected COM files so that they appeared as if they weren’t infected. Whale — at 9KB, the largest virus to date — used the Frodo technique to hide its size and the 1260 shtick to change itself. Neither program infected much of anything, but both excelled at staying hidden.

Twenty years later, the Windows malware pantheon runs chock-full of infected executables, multipartite, polymorphic, and stealth techniques.

The rise of Microsoft macro viruses

Windows 3.0 hit the ground running on May 22, 1990, and soon the platform would go gangbusters. With the exception of Michelangelo, a garden-variety boot sector virus that took out Windows machines, injected the phrase “computer virus” into almost every language on earth, and helped substantiate the lucrative antivirus industry, virus innovation stagnated. Then in the summer of 1995, an epiphany: Somebody — we still don’t know who — wrote a very simple macro virus using WordBasic, the macro language behind Microsoft Word.

Documents infected with this virus, when opened using Word 6, add four macros to Word’s default template, NORMAL.DOT, which then infects any subsequent Word document you save. The macro has a harmless payload, which displays an odd dialog box with the numeral 1. The macro code contains the text “That’s enough to prove my point” — thus, the name Concept.

The floodgates burst. In late August 1995, several Microsoft employees told me that more than 80 percent of all PCs on Microsoft’s Redmond campus were infected by Concept, which spread across the world in a matter of weeks. Antivirus companies scrambled, trying to protect against this completely new attack vector, and virus writers, aided by macro virus construction kits widely distributed in 1996, had a field day. Word took the initial beating, but then Excel spreadsheets came under attack, first with Laroux, then with a deluge of more than 1,000 macro viruses.

Microsoft shored up security in Office 97, but virus writers quickly figured out how to get around the controls, and many old viruses automatically converted over to the new system, using Microsoft’s automatic upgrade tools. The tide didn’t shift until antivirus vendors started to get the upper hand, primarily by brute force, and Microsoft finally made infection more difficult in Office 2000. Even so, Word and Excel macro attacks remained an omnipresent part of the malware landscape until Microsoft finally changed the default file formats in Office 2007.

The end of the century: Communications attacks

Windows-specific malware entered the big time when a Taiwanese programmer, Chen Ing Hau, created CIH (aka Chernobyl), thereby taking stealth infection to a new height.

Using the vagaries of the Portable Executable file format, CIH tucked itself into the parts of an EXE file between the major sections, infecting files without changing their size. Those unlucky enough to have these interstitial infections on Windows 95, 98, or ME systems woke up on April 26, 1999, with bricked PCs. CIH was a devastating virus, but it didn’t spread readily.

Email emerged as a potent delivery mechanism — a point not missed by miscreants whose Good Times hoax (“if you read a message with the subject ‘Good Times’ your hard drive will be destroyed”) scared millions.

The next big jump in malware technology arrived as fireworks, emblazoned on a window entitled “Happy New Year 1999!” Happy99, aka SKA, infects by hijacking a Windows program, taking over the communications program Wsock32.dll. If you send a message from an infected machine, the bogus Wsock32.dll delivers the message, but then shoots out a second, blank message to the same recipient with an attached file, usually called Happy.exe. If the recipient double-clicks on the file, they’re greeted with a fireworks display — and a nasty infection.

Prior to Happy99, other malware hooked into Windows using the same sort of technique, but Happy99 had the foresight to take over the communications routine; thus, it spread prolifically. Adding to the potency: Microsoft stopped showing filename extensions starting with Windows 95, so most users receiving the Happy99.exe file only saw the name “Happy99″ — and all too frequently clicked on it.

David L. Smith, of New Jersey, wrote Melissa, a Word macro virus that scans an infected PC’s Outlook address book and sends copies of itself to the first 50 entries. It was the first successful incarnation of many Windows spam-generating viruses.

Melissa was so prolific it brought down Exchange Servers all over the world on March 26, 1999. CERT says that one server received 32,000 copies of Melissa in 45 minutes. Mr. Smith served 20 months in a federal prison for his efforts. Several months later, another destructive virus, ExploreZip, also used the Outlook address book to propagate; it had a nasty habit of deleting Office documents by overwriting them.

The end of the 20th century saw malware writers take advantage of Visual Basic Script running the Windows Script Host, a combination that would become wildly successful in ensuing years.

The BubbleBoy virus presented the first generally successful drive-by attack. If someone sent you an infected message — no attached file necessary — and you opened the message in Outlook or previewed it in Outlook Express, you got zapped. BubbleBoy took advantage of HTML and Outlook’s propensity to run embedded Visual Basic scripts without warning.

The root of the problem? In those days, Outlook used Internet Explorer to display HTML-based emails. Even though you never saw IE in action, it was there, lurking in the background, running VBS programs without permission. Years later, the Klez worm used the same approach, but with a different security hole.

On May 5, 2000, the ILOVEYOU worm hit, and PCs will never be the same. A remarkably effective demonstration of social engineering techniques that drive malware today, the infected file arrived attached to a message. The message’s subject: ILOVEYOU, and the attachment was called LOVE-LETTER-FOR-YOU.TXT.vbs. Since Windows hid the .vbs filename extension, many people (including, it’s rumored, one very senior Microsoft executive) double-clicked on what appeared to be a TXT file and shot themselves in the foot — the same fatal flaw that took many by surprise with the Happy99 worm.

ILOVEYOU overwrites many different kinds of files and then rifles the Outlook address book, sending copies of itself to every address, much like Melissa. It started spreading on May 4, 2000. By May 13, 50 million PCs were infected.

Several hugely successful malware attacks followed in ILOVEYOU’s technological footsteps. In 2001, the Anna Kournikova worm arrived in an email attachment called AnnaKournikova.jpg.vbs. Sircam grabbed a Word or Excel file on the infected PC and sent out infected versions of the file using the same technique. Many confidential files went out to unexpected recipients. Sircam also spread by copying itself onto network shares.

Beginning of the botnet

Not content to merely distribute malware over the Internet, enterprising programmers started working on ways to control Windows PCs directly using the Internet.

In December 1999, a Brazilian programmer who uses the name Vecna unleashed a new Trojan called Babylonia. While incorporating CIH-style interstitial infection and Happy99-style Winsock replacement, Babylonia brought an important new capability to the malware gene pool: It phoned home, once a minute, and updated itself if a newer version is available.

While its authors claim BackOrifice wasn’t invented to subvert systems, it certainly offered that capability on Windows 95 and 98 systems. Much like today’s botnet controllers, BackOrifice provides remote control — the ability to run one PC from another, over the Internet. BackOrifice isn’t a virus; rather, it’s a payload waiting to be deposited by a virus or a Trojan.

The Sobig worm created the first commercially successful spam-generating botnet, and it did so through infected email attachments. At one point, 1 out of 20 email messages on the Internet contained a Sobig.f infected attachment. Sobig harvested email addresses from files on the infected computer.

Cracking into Windows

By 2001, most malware spread by sending infected files over the Internet or by dropping infected files on network shares. That year, malware writers expanded their horizons by aiming directly for security holes in Windows itself. They also jumped up several levels in sophistication. No longer intent on destroying data or playing pranks, some malware writers turned their considerable talents to making money.

CodeRed infamously infected more than 300,000 Windows Servers, using a buffer overflow to take control of IIS and deface websites on the infected server. CodeRed-infected machines send out buffer overflow packets to random machines on the Internet in a spray attack. Microsoft patched the hole a month before CodeRed appeared, but admins didn’t apply the patches quickly enough. A complete rewrite, CodeRed II, not only engaged in spray attacks, it also attacked local machines.

Then Nimda took the cake. It used five different infection vectors: a blended threat of the first degree. Nimda infects with email attachments. It infects unprotected network shares. It tries to take down websites. It goes after servers in CodeRed-style. And it can use backdoors left behind by CodeRed.

SQL Slammer ricocheted across the Internet in 2003, infecting 75,000 machines in its first 10 minutes, knocking out wide swathes of the Internet. The worm exploited a security hole in SQL Server and SQL Desktop Engine, which had been patched six months previously. It doesn’t put a copy of itself on a hard drive, preferring to simply stay memory resident: Reboot an infected machine, and it isn’t infected any more.

Like SQL Slammer, Blaster (aka Lovsan) zoomed across the Internet at a breakneck pace by scanning machines connected to the Internet and passing itself around. Like Slammer, it used an exploit that had already been patched. Unlike Slammer, Blaster attacked every Windows XP and Windows 2000 computer. The payload tried to take out Microsoft’s windowsupdate.com site with a DDoS attack.

Where the money goes today

Botnets formed years ago are still in operation — a fact that isn’t lost on the folks who bankroll the now highly lucrative malware industry.

The professionals behind these programs don’t take kindly to competition. Sobig was followed by Mydoom, another email-attachment botnet generator, and a malware war broke out between Mydoom, Netsky, Sasser (which took out thousands of companies), and Bagel, each of which attempted to clobber the other. An 18-year-old computer science student in Germany was convicted for creating Sasser and the Netsky.AC variant.

The Zlob Trojan took a new tack by disguising itself as a video codec, deemed necessary to run video files of uncertain pedigree. Zlob has seen dozens of incarnations, most of which are notorious for pimping rogue antimalware, a moneymaking pastime. Zlob has morphed over time and emerged to notoriety five years later as the Alureon rootkit.

In 2007, Storm Worm started as yet another email-attachment botnet generator, but one with a difference: Instead of operating the botnet through a single server, Storm Worm borrowed peer-to-peer technology to disperse control. More than 1 million Windows PCs were infected. The Storm/Waledac botnet was largely broken up in late 2008, but it woke up and started spamming again last month, according to Symantec. Waldec’s handlers are gathering steam for a big Round Two.

Many other botnets have come and gone in the past few years, most of them taken down or severely attenuated by breaking lines of communication and blocking compromised servers. A few remain problematic, most notably ZeuS, a do-it-yourself botnet kit designed to pick up passwords, account numbers, and the like on infected machines, then send them to the chosen drop zone, as well as Conficker, a botnet considered dormant but not completely eradicated.

Spam-generating botnets, such as Waledac, are getting hit hard by Microsoft’s lawyers. Last October, one of the largest spam botnets, Bredolab, was decimated (although not completely eliminated) by the Dutch National Crime Squad.

Where malware is heading

As Windows XP machines die and get replaced by Windows 7, Windows is getting more difficult to crack by orders of magnitude. Little malware players have been squeezed out of the market, and the big players, looking for new opportunities, are finding few low-hanging fruit.

Still, Windows zero-day vulnerabilities are worth a lot of money, and those who find them these days are much less likely to use them to make funny dialog boxes with the number 1.

Because of this, we can expect Windows malware to continue evolving in innovative ways. One prominent trend is the rise of attacks outside of Microsoft-land. Koobface, for example, runs on Windows, but it’s used to harvest information from Facebook and MySpace, convince Facebook users to install rogue antimalware programs, and otherwise turn social networking information into lucre. Nart Villeneuve provides an excellent PDF overview.

Another trend will likely revolve around industrial espionage. Whether or not you believe the Stuxnet worm was designed to break Iranian nuclear enrichment centrifuges, there’s no question that a very capable team constructed a breathtaking array of zero-day Windows cracks and Siemens Step 7 code. Expect motivated organizations to blend innovative threats to get what they want.

As for malware construction kits, ZeuS looks to be only the beginning. By democratizing the construction of malware, sufficiently talented kit creators can make a decent living, at much reduced risk. With kits for sale, the creators don’t have to worry about disseminating the malware without getting caught, keeping drop sites working, or turning information into money. Recently, Brian Krebs reported that ZeuS and SpyEye have apparently joined forces, and the latest ZeuS source code can be purchased for a paltry $100,000. With source code in hand, you can create and sell your very own customized ZeuS construction kits. Think of it as a malware multilevel marketing scheme.

But the most prolific vector for malware innovation will likely reside in social engineering. After all, while it’s getting harder to crack Windows programs, it’s as easy as ever to attack the weakest link: the one between users’ ears. Look for more cons, more fake “Windows tech support” calls, and more bewildered users who will gladly give out sensitive information to anyone who claims they can help fix things.

Windows malware has changed a lot in the past 20 years. People haven’t.

Woody Leonhard writes computer books, primarily about Windows and Office. He’s senior editor at Windows Secrets Newsletter and a frequent contributor to InfoWorld’s Tech Watch blog. A self-described “Windows victim,” Woody specializes in telling the truth about Windows in a way that won’t put you to sleep.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Armed with Facebook, Twitter and YouTube, Students Turn the University of … – Fox News

February 15th, 2011 by admin | No Comments | Filed in Celebrities, Fashion, Google, Hot News, Social Networking, Technology

The same day that Hosni Mubarak, Egypt’s former president, stepped down, the embattled president of the University of Puerto Rico, José Ramón de la Torre, submitted his resignation. 

There was a world of difference between the two, but in their fall, one striking similarity: The embattled administrations of Mubarak and de la Torre succumbed to grassroots movements that, however different in scale, were organized by young people who used social media as a weapon. 

Hours before de la Torre’s resignation became official – and prior to officials’ denials to the contrary – the news hit the Facebook fan page page of Estudiantes de la UPR Informan. 

The 1:11 p.m. post on Friday spread like wildfire, quickly tallying 500 “likes” and dozens of comments in a matter of two hours.

“Thank God,” one of the comments read in Spanish, “a new dawn for our University!”

“You saw this with the disputed Iranian election, with Egypt,” said Wasim Ahmad online journalism professor at Stony Brook University. “It’s a way for other points of view to get out there in a more instantaneous fashion.”

UPR students, who for months have protested the university’s imposition of an $800 special fee tacked on to tuition and a heavy police presence on campus, have circumvented a lack of U.S. media attention by getting the word out through Facebook, Twitter and YouTube.

Though difficult to quantify the tangible effects of social media on grassroots demonstrations, UPR students have tried to leverage social media tools to disseminate images, video and messages without filters.

Students, alumni and professors, for instance, launched the Estudiantes de la UPR Informan Facebook page in April to counter “UPR Informa,” the University of Puerto Rico’s official page. 

The protestors’ version, a page by students for students, has been a destination for news favorable to the social movement. With more than 32,000 Facebook fans, the page has easily outpaced its official counterpart – which launched first – by 8,000 fans.

On Twitter, students and a community of followers of developments on campus have used three hashtags to relay news stories, pictures of rallies and protests, and a home for the discourse to flow freely. #UPR, #HuelgaUPR and #LuchaUPR are three conversations on Twitter that are all University of Puerto Rico, all the time.

Postings have ranged from a flier for a vigil for UPR (“Bring a black shirt,” it reads in part), to sharing an image of a police officer yelling in the face of a female student, to just giving opinions about the latest developments.

Enrique Oropeza, a student reached through Twitter, shared photos he took at a protest last month.

Even celebrities like “Residente,” the lead singer and social activist of international band Calle 13 whose real name is René Pérez Joglar, tweeted in Spanish about the struggles of the protestors.

“Video of what happened today at the University of Puerto Rico, treating the students like they are criminals,” he wrote.

Activists have also used YouTube to post some videos from demonstrations and news segments where police have appeared to use excessive force.

That wide range of social networking, which includes texting, sympathetic blogs and live streaming Internet radio like Radio Huelga, has helped mobilize demonstrators to rallies. 

And those mobilizations – with their increasingly defiant clashes between student and police – directly preceded, if not were responsible for, de la Torre’s resignation and the partial withdrawal of police presence on campus.

The importance of the new media tools to the student protest movement has been immeasurable, however. 

“These new tools allow grassroots organizations to find each other, and makes it easier to get people to the streets or hallways,” said Susannah Vila, director of content and outreach for Movements.org. “It brings people together, generates excitement, but then comes the question: what’s next? It’s hard to answer that question.

“In Egypt and Tunisia, it’s amazing that you these two dictators have been ousted, but what’s going to follow,” she continued. “Technology helps to aid revolution, but it’s hard to help with governance afterward. It poses new challenges.”

Ahmad, too, cautioned that social media is only a tool. In large movements, he warned, traditional leadership must emerge after new communication platforms have served their purpose.

“You can’t have a Twitter hashtag running a country,” he said. “It will be interesting to see how these things plays out.”

In Puerto Rico, things are beginning to play out, for better or worse. The university has named an interim president, Miguel A. Muñoz, and the online community will be watching.

The Estudiantes de la UPR Informan Facebook fan page, for one, was abuzz with a mix of optimism and wariness.

“Time will tell,” one student commented. “We’ll see what happens…crossing my fingers.”

You can reach Wil Cruz at wil.cruz@foxnewslatino.com and Adrian Carrasquillo at adrian.carrasquillo@foxnewslatino.com.

Follow us on twitter.com/foxnewslatino
Like us at facebook.com/foxnewslatino

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Call to give Obama ‘kill switch’ powers to cut internet access in the event of … – Daily Mail

February 1st, 2011 by admin | No Comments | Filed in Google, Hot News, Mobile, Social Networking

By
David Gardner
Last updated at 4:46 AM on 1st February 2011

While the Egyptian government has drawn international criticism for shutting down internet and mobile phone access during civil unrest, it might alarm many Americans to learn that Barack Obama may soon have the same powers.

Lawmakers are set to debate a controversial new plan to give the President the power to shut down the Internet in case of a cyber emergency.

The proposal is certain to meet opposition, but Senator Susan Collins, the co-sponsor of the bill, insisted today that the legislation would not be used for censorship.

Obama

‘Turn it off!’: Under proposed new laws, President Barack Obama would have the power to cut access to the internet in the event of a cyber threat to national security

She said it would ‘provide a mechanism for the government to work with the private sector in the event of a true cyber emergency.

‘It would give our nation the best tools available to swiftly respond to a significant threat.’

Former vice presidential candidate Joe Lieberman, chairman of the U.S. Homeland Security Committee, said safeguards were needed to ‘preserve those networks and assets and our country and protect our people’.

He claimed national security was at risk from new foes such as ‘cyber warriors, cyber spies, cyber terrorists and cyber criminals’.

He said: ‘For all its allure, the Internet can be a dangerous place with electronic pipelines that run directly into everything from our personal bank accounts to key infrastructure to government and industrial secrets.’

Senators

Presidential powers: Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee Chairman Joseph Lieberman and Senator Susan Collins. Both are in favour of a ‘kill switch’ bill

The issue has been brought into sharp focus by moves by the Egyptian authorities in recent days to disrupt activists by preventing them from using the Internet or their phones to arrange rallies.

Egypt’s four main Internet service providers reportedly cut off international access for their customers at the same time last Thursday.

Officials said the shutdown is the most comprehensive official electronic blackout in history.

Mr Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have both called on the Egyptian government to restore the Internet and social networking sites.

The plan to give the president the right to flip the kill switch of the Internet has already attracted opposition from abroad.

Bjorn Landfeldt, an associate professor at the University of Sydney, Australia, said taking the Internet offline would ‘inflict an enormous damage on the world’.

He added that it would be tantamount to giving a country ‘the right to poison the atmosphere, or poison the ocean’.

But officials said there was no intention to paralyse the Internet.

Republican Brandon Milhorn said: ‘We’re not trying to mandate any requirement for the entire Internet backbone.’

He said the proposal would only assert governmental control over those ‘crucial components that form our nation’s critical infrastructure’.

One contentious provision of the bill is that it would prevent private companies from contesting the shutdown in court.

Steve DelBianco, director of the NetChoice coalition – which includes eBay, Oracle, Verisign and Yahoo as members – said: ‘Judicial review is our main concern. A designation of critical information infrastructure brings with it huge obligations for upgrades and compliance.’

In some cases, said Mr DelBianco, a company might have a ‘good-faith disagreement’ with the government’s ruling and would want to seek court review.

He said: ‘The country we’re seeking to protect is a country that respects the right of any individual to have their day in court. Yet this bill would deny that day in court to the owner of infrastructure.’

Share this article:

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,