Mediaboss Marketing

19-02-2012 16:16 The free world of the Internet is at stake right now. Free speech is at stake. I believe we must do everything in our powers to stop the criminals from taking it away. All information is posted below! Follow me on Twitter. twitter.com Cyber Security Act (Internet Kill Switch) http://www.wired.com SOPA en.wikipedia.org PIPA en.wikipedia.org

View original post here:
The Zionists Are Trying To Kill The Internet - MarmiteMan4 - Video

Heard the one about the FBI shutting down the Internet next month?

Like many memes before it, this dire warning is floating around blogs and sites. It even names a date: March 8 as the day the FBI might "shut down the Internet." But relax, that’s not really the case.

While yes, an untold number of people may lose their Internet connection in less than three weeks, if they do they only have nefarious web criminals to blame and certainly not the FBI.

If people end up in the dark on March 8 it’s because they’re still infected with the malware the FBI started warning people about last November when it shut down a long-standing Estonian Web traffic hijacking operation that controlled people’s computers using a family of DNSChanger viruses. The malware works by replacing the DNS (Domain Name System) servers defined on a victim's computer with fraudulent servers operated by the criminals. As a result, visitors are unknowingly redirected to websites that distributed fraudulent software or displayed ads that put money into the bad guys’ pockets.

Site predicts a March 8 shutdown.

Here's the worst part: The malware also prevents security updates and disables installed security software.

To help protect victims, the FBI replaced the rogue servers with legitimate ones -- a measure the agency said would be in effect for 120 days. Had it not taken that step and simply shut down the bad servers back in November, infected computers would have been immediately blocked from Internet access.

So the current problem isn’t that the FBI will be shutting down the Internet when the 120 days runs out on March 8, it’s that many people and organizations haven’t removed the malware from their computers. In fact, as many as half of Fortune 500 companies and government agencies are delinquent in updating, according to some reports.

So how do you know if your computer or router is infected with DNSChanger?

The FBI says the best way to know is to have them checked out by a computer professional, which admittedly isn’t very helpful.

However, it does offer a resource paper [PDF] with guidance to make that determination yourself, although even if you find out your system is infected the FBI says you still need a pro to scrub your machine.

As another alternative, you can use the free Avira DNS Repair Tool to figure out if a computer is using one of the temporary DNS servers. Unfortunately, the tool only works on Windows and doesn't actually remove the Trojan.

Indeed, removing the malware is a challenge, and many people will be cut off from Internet access on March 8, reports the security news site KrebsonSecurity. It also notes that the industry and law enforcement group DNSChanger Working Group (DCWG) has a site that can help people check whether their systems are infected.

To get help, network administrators can send a request to one of the members of the DCWG and home users can use the step-by-step instructions at the DCWG Web site to see if they’re infected with the DNSChanger malware.

If you determine your system is infected you can start from scratch and reinstall your operating system, or take the FBI’s advice and get help from a professional if you want to remain online after March 8.

Follow Christina on Twitter and Google+ for even more tech news and commentary and follow Today@PCWorld on Twitter, too.

See the article here:
Truth About the March 8 Internet Doomsday

All this year, and culminating in December at the World Conference on International Telecommunications in Dubai, the nations of the world will be negotiating a treaty to govern international telecommunications services between countries. It is widely believed that some countries, including Russia and China, will take the opportunity to push for U.N. control of Internet governance. Such a turn of events would certainly be troubling.

That’s because the institutions that govern the Internet, and which keep it free and open, are for the most part decentralized, bottom-up, multistakeholder affairs. They are also largely based in the U.S. These include organizations like the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), headquartered in California, as well as the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and the Internet Society, which are volunteer groups manned largely by Americans.

(MORE: FTC to ICANN: New Domain Suffixes Will ‘Undermine’ the Internet)

This arrangement grew out of the fact that the Internet was developed in the U.S., with control of its governance eventually handed over to nonprofits by the government during the Clinton Administration.

As the Internet has grown and spread across the globe, however, emerging powers such as Brazil, Russia, India and China have begun to frequently and forcefully question why the U.S. should have outsize influence over how the Internet is run. They suggest, instead, that Internet governance should be handled by the U.N. Last year, for example, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin met with the head of the International Telecommunication Union — the U.N. body now hosting treaty negotiations — and made no bones about how Russia saw things.

“One [important issue] is establishing international control over the Internet using the monitoring and supervisory capabilities of the International Telecommunication Union,” Putin said. “If we are going to talk about the democratization of international relations, I think a critical sphere is information exchange and global control over such exchange. This is certainly a priority on the international agenda.”

Along with China, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan, Russia later introduced a U.N. General Assembly resolution proposing a “code of conduct” for global information security.

The proposal sought to establish that “policy authority for Internet-related public issues is the sovereign right of States” and not the ICANN, the IETF or the other multistakeholder groups that now run the Internet. At the same time, Brazil, India and South Africa called for creation of “new global body” to control the Internet.

It’s amazing to think about it, but no state governs the Internet today. Decisions about its architecture are made by consensus among engineers and other volunteers. And that, in fact, is what has kept it open and free.

“Upending the fundamentals of the multistakeholder model is likely to balkanize the Internet at best, and suffocate it at worst,” FCC commissioner Robert McDowell said recently in a speech. “A top-down, centralized, international regulatory overlay is antithetical to the architecture of the Net, which is a global network of networks without borders. No government, let alone an intergovernmental body, can make decisions in lightning-fast Internet time.”

While there are some signs that the proregulatory countries may be backing off, the Internet community should remain vigilant. We may be headed for a showdown this December in Dubai that could make recent antipiracy legislation, pending cybersecurity bills in Congress and the E.U.’s new data rules look like a picnic.

MORE: FBI Hacked While Congress Ponders Cybersecurity Legislation

Read this article:
The Case Against Letting the United Nations Govern the Internet

Reporting from Moscow—

The videos feature some of Russia's most famous actors, writers, directors, musicians and other VIPs, all united by the heartfelt slogan: "Why I am voting for Putin."

Violist Yuri Bashmet compares Russian leader Vladimir Putin to the great violin-maker Antonio Stradivari, saying that his "golden period is yet far ahead."

One of the country's most loved actors, Oleg Tabakov, says Putin has his vote in the March 4 presidential election because he "wants to be good and honest."

As soon as the clips started airing on Russia's heavily controlled major television networks, the Internet empire struck back.

One user posted a picture of the Russian poet Alexander Pushkin raising eyebrows over the phrase, "Why I am voting for our Lord Emperor." Pushkin is known to have been exiled and had his poetry personally censored by Emperor Nicholas I.

Another went further, posting a portrait of Putin with a clipped mustache and shock of black hair and the inscription: "Why I am voting for Hitler."

In the course of the swift and getting-dirtier-by-the-day presidential race that Putin is widely expected to win, he has had to suffer unprecedented humiliation. Much like the authoritarian Chinese leadership, the Kremlin has found it difficult to control the rebellious Internet, let alone protect itself from the biting satire that has been the dissident weapon of choice throughout a Russian history rich in suppression.

It is perhaps not coincidental that one of the first television shows that Putin got rid of after coming to power was the sarcastic puppet show "Kukly," which in the early 2000s portrayed him as Klein Zaches, a mean and ambitious dwarf from a 19th century tale by the German author E.T.A. Hoffmann.

Putin is quite aware of "the dirty attacks" against him on the Internet but ignores them and doesn't feel in the least taken aback by them, his spokesman Dmitry Peskov said.

"It is all extremely unpleasant, but it is also marginal in its effect, as it aims at people who virtually live in the Internet and their numbers are insignificant compared with the support Putin gets from the rest of the Russian population," Peskov said in a telephone interview. "We are not going to look for those who make up these things, and we are not planning to sue them in court because it is useless as we won't catch them in the end, it being Internet and all."

But if the numbers are so insignificant, how then to explain the 3-million-plus hits for a YouTube spoof that hit the Internet last week?

In a scene that clearly is meant to echo the politicized trials of imprisoned tycoon Mikhail Khodorkovsky, a defendant stands alone in a courtroom cage, shy and timid.

"What is your nationality?" the judge asks. "A citizen of the Russian Federation," the frail man, eyes cast downward, answers almost inaudibly in the unmistakable rapid clatter of sounds that Russians know so well from Putin's marathon prime-time TV call-in shows, endless televised reports of motorcycle trips, hunting escapades and diving tours, not to mention daily meetings with workers, intellectuals, scientists and farmers.

The man who has ruled Russia with an iron hand for more than a decade faces a set of sinister charges, including abuse of power, fraud, theft and organizing terrorist acts to intimidate citizens, a monotonous voice-over recounts.

Peskov acknowledged that the quality of this and other spoofs he called "virus clips" was very high.

"It is no secret how many enemies Putin has and how they are ready to spend any amount of money to blacken him," he said.

The Internet was also quick to seize on a recent slip by Putin's chief of campaign staff, filmmaker Stanislav S. Govorukhin. In a newspaper interview, he said that under Putin, the notorious Russian corruption has acquired "civilized" forms.

Govorukhin is famous and respected in the country largely for his 1979 Soviet crime miniseries, in which a tough but good cop pronounced the catchphrase that became the series' slogan: "A thief must sit in prison."

Govorukhin could hardly imagine how the whole thing could haunt the current campaign more than three decades later.

The day after his "civilized corruption" comment, some resourceful Internet user posted on Facebook a photo collage in which Govorukhin and Putin face each other across the table in the foreground. Behind them is a Kremlin tower with these words flying in the dark sky over it: "A thief must sit in the Kremlin."

But the campaign manager surmised in the interview that "this anti-Putin hysteria" actually mobilizes people in the provinces to stand up for Putin and makes his victory easier. Govorukhin said he doesn't use the Internet, something his boss, by his own admission, isn't very fond of, either.

"The Internet is, after all, a big garbage bin," Govorukhin said. "I have no time for it."

sergei.loiko@latimes.com

Originally posted here:
Vladimir Putin is spoofed on the Internet

Egypt's "Facebook Revolution" that toppled Hosni Mubarak last February may have been boosted by Internet social networking, but his downfall was inevitable anyway, a communications expert said on Sunday.

"It was a people's revolution, accelerated, facilitated by the Internet," said Rasha Abdulla, associate professor of journalism and mass communication at the American University in Cairo (AUC).

Without social networks such as Twitter and YouTube, "it would have happened but much later," she said, adding: "Practically it helped people to organise."

Abdulla was speaking at a conference entitled "Tweeting the revolution: how social media helped bring down a dictator."

"This revolution didn't start in 2011, but it accelerated with the introduction of blogs" around 2003 in Egypt, before social media really began making their mark, she said.

She singled out the posting online after 2005 of videos showing sexual harassment or police violence, and the formation of the "Kefaya" ("Enough" in Arabic) movement aimed at the Mubarak regime the same year.

Online appeals also played a great part in mobilising strikes in early April 2008, leading to the creation of the "April 6 Group," a driving force behind last year's revolution.

"The new thing in 2011 is instead of having demos of 20 to 200 people, all of a sudden they had masses of people," Abdulla said.

Gradually social networks created "horizontal communication" between Internet users talking to each other one-on-one, she said, and "gave them that sense of 'I have a voice, I'm entitled to speak and I will speak, this is my country.'"

She also said the Facebook page "We are all Khaled Said" -- dedicated to a young man beaten to death by police in Alexandria -- played a huge role in sparking the revolution.

"The page that had the biggest effect. This page was instrumental, the first page in Egypt to have such a big number" of members, Abdulla said.

"It was a political page by nature. All the conversations on the page were political. When the call for the 25th of January came, almost half a million clicked on the 'I'm attending' button. That encouraged the people."

"There was momentum in the air," she said of Tunisia's uprising against president Zine el-Abidine Ben Ali. Conditions were ripe for a mass mobilisation in Egypt.

View post:
Internet boosted the inevitable in Egypt: expert