Mediaboss Marketing

Hackers offering free anti-virus software to battle against the WannaCry infection say they have had thousands of downloads since releasing their work online.

One hacker who goes under the twitter name @HIBC2017 says he spent 36 hours designing an anti-virus programme that directly protects computers from the ransomware which has infected an estimated 200,000 systems worldwide since Friday.

"The problem with anti-virus software is that it can take you a while to get set up whereas, with the code I've designed, it can protect instantly," he told Sky News.

"I've put it online for free and made it so you just click on a few buttons."

"I've had more than 5,000 downloads so far which is brilliant but I'm just happy that I'm making people's lives easier."

Other so-called "white hat hackers" have also designed and released free anti-virus software to the masses to fight against the "black hat hackers".

The author of "Tearstopper" says their software has helped around 2,000 people protect themselves.

Microsoft also released a patch to help secure computers from the vulnerability that the WannaCry ransomware is taking advantage of, but thousands of users are clearly making use of the work of more amateur hackers, who often work in bedrooms just for fun and curiosity.

The coordinated attack on Friday hit the NHS and dozens of countries worldwide. It is believed to be the biggest attack of its kind.

Evidence suggests a group linked to North Korea was behind the hack, according to security experts.

It is widely known that 22-year-old UK security researcher, Marcus Hutchins, discovered a hidden "kill switch" which managed to slow the spread of the attack after discovering a weakness.

Other hackers have offered advice and collaborated on work to understand the virus.

Many hackers are apparently angry with this attack as it crossed a line by harming the work of doctors in the NHS.

Some hackers say they are now determined to help the authorities track down the culprits. "There's a lot of talent out there doing this around the clock," @HIBC2017 said.

"It's just a matter of time until they're caught and many people will be helping in any way they can."

Read the original:
Hackers offer free anti-virus after ransomware cyberattack - Sky News - Sky News

ST. PAUL, Minn. About 100 people from the legislature and various groups around the state gathered in the basement of the Capitol building to protest proposed Republican legislation that would implement stand your ground laws in the state of Minnesota.

Together they held signs that said, Protect Minnesota working together to prevent gun violence.

This bill poses a risk a risk to people of color, to those who look different, and seem scary to some, Sen. John Marty (D-Roseville) said Wednesday. We do not need a death penalty for minor offenses.

Lawmakers, leaders of groups, and religious organizations repeatedly referred to examples involving children when speaking about the potential group at risk if the proposed legislation is passed. Kids whose frisbee goes over the wrong fence is at risk, Marty told the crowd.

The legislation proposed, H.F. 238, has many Republican co-authors and is considered a standard stand your ground law. Similar legislation has been implemented around the country.

As Alpha News reported in March, Republicans were quick to defend the bill stating that people should try to escape if they find themselves in a dangerous situation, but if there is no other option, deadly force can be used.

However, Asad Zampan, Executive Director of the Muslim American Society of Minnesota shared his concern with a specific piece of the legislation that removes a section of current law which states,

The intentional taking of the life of another is not authorized by section 609.06, except when necessary in resisting or preventing an offense which the actor reasonably believes exposes the actor or another to great bodily harm or death, or preventing the commission of a felony in the actors place of abode.

Rep. David Pinto (D-St. Paul), who is also a Ramsey County Prosecutor said, There are many scenarios that we can reference that would not hold people accountable in case of deadly force. Pinto discussed proposed legislation that hes authored which would require background checks for the transfers of guns between owners.

There are so many other things that we should be talking about and this sure is not one of them, Pastor Brian Herron Sr. of Zion Baptist said. America, for too long has had a love affair with guns.

Carin Mrtoz, Executive Director of Jewish Community Action told the crowd, Many of those in favor of the law speak of it benefiting our [the Jewish] community, but laws like this will not make my community safer.

This is being proposed by people who claim to be pro-life, Imam Asad Zampan, the Executive Director of the Muslim American Society of Minnesota told the crowd. I want to know how anyone who is pro-life could be in favor of deleting a section of law that says, the intentional taking of life of another is not authorized.

Rob Doar, Vice President and Political Director for the Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus disagrees with the negativity surrounding stand your ground laws.

The burden is on the victim to prove that they did not have a reasonable means of retreat, rather than the more standard practice elsewhere in criminal law that an individuals actions are presumed lawful until proved otherwise, Doar said. We support HF 238 because it codifies the elements of self defense into the statute, providing the most protections to it citizens, and guidance to the courts.

The legislation was expected to be heard on the floor of the House on Wednesday, but Marty announced the legislation would not be heard on the floor after all.

comments

See the article here:
Stand Your Ground is Unnecessary, Protesters Say - Alpha News MN

Father of man fatally shot at gated community in 2016 talks about how frustrating the case has been. Video by Michael Braun

Ryan Douglas Modell, 32, who died in a Lee County development March 20, 2016.(Photo: Special to news-press.com)

The father whose son was shot and killed in south Lee County in 2016 when he mistakenly knocked on the wrong door wants the governor to appoint anindependent state attorney and let a grand jury review the case.

A letter written by attorney Mark O'Mara, who represents Sandy Modell, the father of Ryan Modell, was sent via Federal Express to the governor's office Monday.

Modell remains adamant that his son was murdered and cant understand why the man who he accuses of the shooting hasnt been arrested.

"Mark is simply asking the governor to reassign it to get the same objective state attorney review we've been asking for," Modell said.

The state attorney's office for the 20th district, in March, decidednot to bring chargesagainst James Taylor, the man who shot Ryan Modell.

Death of 32-year-old justified under Stand Your Ground, no charges for shooter

Sandy Modell talks about the March 20, 2016, shooting at the gated Emerson Square community in south Lee County that claimed his son Ryan's life.(Photo: Michael Braun/The News-Press)

The state attorneys office said Taylor was justified under Floridas Stand Your Ground law to kill Modell because he feared for his life.

The law was made infamous after George Zimmerman was acquitted of murder charges in the 2012 death of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in Sanford. O'Mara represented Zimmerman in the Martin case.

According to the state attorneys office, Modell was a well-developed, well-nourished man who stood at 6-foot-1 and weighed 224 pounds. Modell was 32 when he died.He lived with his girlfriend at an apartment that was identical to Taylors.

While Ryan Modell was walking back to his girlfriends Emerson Square apartment in south Lee County around 2 a.m. on March 20, 2016, he mistook one apartment for another and tried opening the door, his dad and girlfriend said. He was allegedly confronted by Taylor and fatally shot.

Sandy Modell says that State Attorney Stephen B. Russell should be supportive of the request.

"There should be no [problem with this," he said. "If they did a responsible job they should support it."

"We made our decision and found it was an appropriate Stand Your Ground application and will have no further prosecutorial action," said state attorney spokeswoman Samantha Syoen. "It was reviewed by Assistant State Attorney Dan Feinberg of our Homicide Unit."

O'Mara, in the letter to the governor, says: "Even when told in the light most favorable to Mr. Taylor, his own words, the facts do not justify the shooting death of Ryan Modell. This is not an instance of self-defense. This is an unjustified homicide."

Lee County father looking for answers in son's shooting death

Sandy Modell said that no matter what happens it would be small comfort.

"This is not about guns, the Second Amendment or Stand Your Ground," Sandy Modell said. "It's about murder. We're looking for an objective review."

He said that if the review was granted and a murder charge eventually levied he would be a "little less miserable."

He also said the request has no downside for the governor.

Father, friends remember man shot in south Lee County

If he denied it, Sandy Modell said, it would be a vindication for the local state attorney's office.

"If it is approved," Sandy Modell said, "the governor prevents a travesty."

Connect with this reporter: MichaelBraunNP (Facebook) @MichaelBraunNP (Twitter)

Read or Share this story: http://newspr.es/2rnUmtF

Originally posted here:
Review of south Lee 'Stand Your Ground' case sought - The News-Press

The Second Amendment is only 27 words, but Americans have used millions of words arguing over what it means. It guarantees the right of the people to keep and bear arms. But which people, what arms, and under what circumstances?

Two milestone cases involving the Second Amendment that reached the Supreme Court are District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), declaring an individual has a right to own a firearm, and McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010), affirming the Second Amendment applies to state law.

WHY JUSTICE GORSUCH WILL HAVE AN IMMEDIATE (AND BIG) IMPACT ON THE SUPREME COURT

Now, if the Supreme Court decides to hear it, there may be a third major case in a decade: Peruta v. California.

At issue is the right to keep and bear arms outside the home.The Heller case specifically applies to situations within the home.Those who have petitioned the Supreme Court to hear the case are hoping the justices will see it as a logical extension of their earlier opinions.

The case arose when Edward Peruta and other gun owners who lived in or near San Diego, Calif., couldnt get concealed-carry permits in their county. The Sheriffs Department handles permit requests and requires good cause to carry a gun outside of the home.This does not mean a generalized concern for safety, but something specific, such as fear of domestic violence or a regular need to move large amounts of money.

If the Supreme Court decides to hear it, there may be a third major case in a decade involving the Second Amendment. (Reuters)

There were two separate lawsuits challenging the interpretation of good cause, but the district courts found no violation of the Second Amendment.

CALIFORNIA CONCEALED WEAPON LAW TOSSED BY FED APPEALS COURT

Then, in 2014, a three-judge panel on the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2-1 that the policy did indeed violate the right to bear arms for self-defense. The state, however, got a new hearing in front of 11 9th Circuit judges, who decided 7-4, the restrictions for concealed-carry permits were allowable.

The case has now been appealed to the Supreme Court and though the Justices have rescheduled its consideration several times, some experts feel the court is finally ready to hear Peruta.

I suspect theyre going to grant it, said John Eastman, former law dean at Chapman University and the director of the Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence.

Eastman told Fox News, its percolating all across the country.

He also feels the justices may have put it off while waiting for a full complement on the court, which they got when Neil Gorsuch was confirmed last month.Gorsuch, in fact, may be the justice to tip the opinion in one direction or the other, as previous Second Amendment cases were determined in a 5-4 ruling.

According to Eugene Volokh, professor of law at University of California at Los Angeles, this case is primed for the Supreme Court, as it deals with a basic constitutional right and the lower courts are split on the issue.

It would be a good time for the highest court to step in and settle the controversy.He also feels that while no one is sure how Gorsuch will vote, there is a sense that hes sympathetic to a broader view of the Second Amendment.

The case may turn on how the court frames the issue.To Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the University of California Irvine School of Law, the legal question to be settled is whether a state like California may determine its own rules on concealed-carry permits.

The Second Amendment isnt an absolute right, Chemerinsky notes. Throughout British and American history, theres never been a right to have concealed weapons.

But Eugene Volokh believes theres a bigger issue at stake. If the state of California, which essentially bans open carry of a gun, makes it next to impossible for a typical citizen to get a concealed-carry permit, this is tantamount to banning the right to bear arms except for a few favored people.

Experts agree on one point. As Chemerinsky puts it, if Peruta is taken up, no matter what the Supreme Court says, it will be a landmark decision.

Read more:
Second Amendment case may be headed to Supreme Court

It saddens me to see the amount of gun violence in this country, and it is even worse to see there is nothing being done to stop it. After every shooting, we discuss the horrific event, and we mourn the victims, but when will anything change? Discussion about gun violence and the Second Amendment is great, but when will we take initiative?

Seeing news about shootings or acts of gun violence should never be something to which we become accustomed. These events will keep happening if the amendment is not questioned. I would rather see more regulation in the Second Amendment than feel unsafe everywhere I go. The Bill of Rights was written over 200 years ago, and maybe the Second Amendment was more applicable during that time. Currently, I feel that it's depriving me of my safety rather than giving me the ability to protect myself.

Carly Novell, Parkland

Read the rest here:
Does the Second Amendment really keep us safe? | Letters - Sun Sentinel