Tag Archive for Verizon

Mobile Malware FUD?

Mobile Malware FUD?Just last week, I wondered out loud from my Bach Seat if all the hype around mobile malware was real or just more FUD. Looks like I am not alone, TechCo recently asked a similar question, “Are We Overstating the Threats from Mobile Devices?

mobile threatsThe author cites several recent reports that back up the claim that the actual mobile threats that mobile devices introduce into the enterprise are overstated. The data indicates that the mobile malware threat is statistically small and has even decreased since 2012.

• A McAfee report shows out of all the malware now out there, only 1.9% of it is mobile malware. The author equates the mobile threat to 4 million / 195 million McAfee knows about.
• Another report (PDF) from Verizon (VZ) shows even lower numbers, with only 0.03 percent of smartphones being infected with what is called “higher grade malicious code.”
hit by lighting• But some numbers go even lower than that. Damballa, a mobile security vendor that monitors roughly half of mobile data traffic, recently released a report that claims you have a better chance of getting hit by lightning than by mobile malware. Dramballa found only 9,688 smartphones out of more than 150 million showed signs of malware infection. If you do the math, that comes out to an infection rate of 0.0064 percent.

Even more interesting is that despite the increase in mobile devices, Damballa found the infection rate had declined by half compared to 2012.

Walled gardenThese reports may show mobile threats aren’t as big of a problem as previously thought, but the author asks, why the numbers are so low at all. After all, cybercriminals like to target new platforms and exploit security weaknesses. Why do they seem to be avoiding mobile devices?

The truth of the matter is that mobile users tend to get their apps from high-quality app stores. The stores from Google (GOOG) and Apple (AAPL) work to filter out suspicious apps. If malware is found in apps after they’ve already been on the market for a while, app stores can also execute a kill switch, which takes the app off the store and the devices where they were downloaded. This limits malware’s ability to spread.

remotely wipe devicesThe article concludes that companies that adopt BYOD should just ignore BYOD security; they just don’t have to go all-out as many businesses have done. Most mobile security experts say a mobile device management system remains a good investment to make sure mobile devices are handled appropriately. MDM systems also allow an organization to remotely wipe devices, thus keeping sensitive data safe in the event a device is lost or stolen. But malware really isn’t a factor in those cases, so the overall message from these recent reports is that getting worked up over mobile threats is not necessary. A company can still gain all the benefits of BYOD without having to worry incessantly over what they’re doing to protect every device that connects to their network.

rb-

What do you think?

Is mobile malware over-hyped FUD?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

 

Related articles
  • Your BYOD implementation checklist (powermore.dell.com)

 

Ralph Bach has been in IT long enough to know better and has blogged from his Bach Seat about IT, careers, and anything else that catches his attention since 2005. You can follow him on LinkedInFacebook, and Twitter. Email the Bach Seat here.

AT&T Already Profits from Net Neutrality

AT&T Already Profits from Net NeutralityIn further proof that no matter what – the huge corporations always win, AT&T (T), one of the most vocal opponents to net neutrality has already started to profit from it. FierceTelecom is reporting that AT&T’s new reclassification under Title II of the Communications Act as part of new net neutrality rules are working in the mega-Bell’s favor.

the huge corporations always winThe article says regulators cited Title II to justify a ruling for AT&T. The FCC ruling said AT&T should be awarded damages for being overcharged by two Michigan-based rural telcos for interstate access services. Now the FCC has to set how much money AT&T should receive from East Lansing-based Great Lakes Comnet (GLC) and Westphalia Telephone Company (WTC). The FCC wrote in its order, “We agree with AT&T.

Initially, AT&T asked for a $12 million refund and wants to avoid paying an extra $4.3 million that Westphalia and Great Lakes claim the telco owes them. The author explains that the FCC argued that AT&T was billed unlawfully because of Section 201(b) of the Communications Act. This is the part of Title II that says: “All charges, practices, classifications, and regulations for and in connection with such communication service, shall be just and reasonable, and any such charge, practice, classification, or regulation that is unjust or unreasonable is declared to be unlawful.

Verizon raised consumer phone rates to fund the broadband network they objected toIronically, during the run-up to the net neutrality decision,  AT&T, Verizon (VZ), Comcast (CMCSA), and other telcos claimed that regulation would hurt their profits, which seems like misinformation BS. The FierceTelecom article reports that the FCC said that it won’t set specific price caps or tell service providers what they can charge for service, consumers can complain to the FCC if their provider is overcharging them for service.

FierceTelecom also points to an Ars Technica report, that Verizon (VZ), another outspoken critic of applying Title II to broadband services, ironically used its common carrier status for POTS services to build its FiOS fiber-to-the-home (FTTH) network. Besides leveraging Title II to get access to utility poles and rights-of-way to string up fiber, Verizon raised consumer phone rates to fund the fiber build.

rb-

This could be written-off as unintended consequences or is it? Is the goobermnet in bed with the Telco’s and all the net neutrality hub-bub was just a show?

Quoting MLive

the leaders making our laws, writing our budgets, and setting the agenda are not widely seen as effective … there’s a serious and alarming lack of leadership …

Related articles

 

Ralph Bach has been in IT long enough to know better and has blogged from his Bach Seat about IT, careers, and anything else that catches his attention since 2005. You can follow him on LinkedInFacebook, and Twitter. Email the Bach Seat here.

Net Neutrality – We Win

Let the lawsuits begin!

Net Neutrality - We Win

In addition to the lawyers, lining up to squash Net Neutrality, Michigan’s own Fred Upton—who holds personal investments in AT&T, Comcast, and Verizon—has introduced anti-Net Neutrality legislation that eliminates the FCC’s authority to regulate internet service providers and could crush the agency’s ruling and allow AT&T (T), Comcast (CMCSA) and Verizon (VZ) to rule the Internet at our cost to grow their profits.

rb-

I have already seen an ad on BrightHouse cable from Broadband For America, (whose membership page is empty) claiming that the FCC ruling will force them to raise taxes. Here come more imaginary “Regulatory re-captureprofits fees.

For right now, this is a rare win for the 99% in post 9-11 ‘murica. Just follow the money.

Related articles

 

Ralph Bach has been in IT long enough to know better and has blogged from his Bach Seat about IT, careers, and anything else that catches his attention since 2005. You can follow him on LinkedInFacebook, and Twitter. Email the Bach Seat here.

ISPs – Brits Speed U.S. Squabble

ISPs – Brits Speed U.S. SquabbleBritish Telecom has announced its plan to transform the UK broadband landscape from superfast to ultrafast. CircleID reports that the company plans to deliver much faster broadband for homes and small businesses via a widespread deployment of “G.fast” (G.9701) — a technology the company will pilot test this Summer. G.fast is aimed to help BT deliver ultrafast speeds of up to 500 Mbps to most of the UK within a decade. The deployment will start in 2016–2017, BT says.

US broadbandThe day before, the FCC announced that they have re-defined the meaning of broadband in the United States. Under the new definition, US broadband has changed from a measly 4 Mbps down and 1 Mbps up to an anemic 25 Mbps down and 3 Mbps up. There will be little impact for the end-user because this is just gooberment posturing. This will put the US in some low rank internationally. While the UK global telecom giant BT sets its sites on 500 Mbps. The FCC’s presser states that the ruling is meaningless. Their own document says:

… its 25/3 benchmark as a standard to measure the progress of broadband deployment. However, the benchmark is not a minimum speed requirement and does not prevent broadband service providers from advertising or describing slower service as broadband.

Republicans blasted the new definition of broadbandNot surprisingly, 100% of US ISP’s are against this redefinition of broadband the cable lobby is opposed to the FCC’s plan. Ars Technica reports that the Telecommunications Association (NCTA) wrote in an FCC filing Thursday (PDF) that, “Customers do just fine with lower speeds.”

In addition to the CableCo lobby’s opposition, PCWorld reports that Republicans blasted the FCC report and new definition of broadband.

rb-

The Register notes how little things have changed. Haters are going to hate. In 2008, Commissioner Robert McDowell opposed increasing the speed definition of broadband from 200Kbps to 768Kbps. McDowell today represents Washington DC law firm Wiley Rein and appeared last week in Congress arguing that the FCC should not introduce net neutrality rules.

Do you want Comcast in charge of the web? Support net neutrality.

Related articles

 

Ralph Bach has been in IT long enough to know better and has blogged from his Bach Seat about IT, careers, and anything else that catches his attention since 2005. You can follow him on LinkedInFacebook, and Twitter. Email the Bach Seat here.

ALU Gets 31 Tbps

ALU Gets 31 TbpsDavid Meyer at GigaOM noted the latest tests by Alcatel-Lucent’s (ALU) venerable Bell Labs division. The lab has figured out how to increase the bandwidth of submarine cables by a factor of three. They were able to move traffic at 31 Terabits per second (Tbps).

Alcatel-Lucent logoAlcatel-Lucent says it has broken the record for the amount of data that can be pushed through submarine cables. They claim to have achieved 31 Terabits per second over a single fiber that’s 4,474 miles long. For comparison, the Register figured that the average 15 minute, low-res movie is about 100Mb in size. They calculate that the new cable could speed 40,632 flix across the Atlantic every second. That would be enough for 423 days and nights of non-stop video viewing – in just one second.

It is important to remember we’re talking about a lab test. The test took place at ALU’s Innovation City campus in Villarceaux near Paris. The GigaOm article notes that the researchers with Bell Labs squeezed almost 10 Tbps more out of the fiber than the 21.7Tbps that NEC (6701) and Verizon (VZ) managed last year. This is three times roomier than in today’s most advanced commercial undersea cables.

Transoceanic cable

transoceanic cableThe author points out that that’s just one fiber and a transoceanic cable may have eight pairs of fibers. Again, this is a lot of capacity. However, it’s also worth noting that Alcatel-Lucent’s tests required a signal amplifier every 100km along the line.

The article claims that ALU’s Bell Labs division has done this type of research since 1925 in New Jersey. This type of work is more critical to ALU than ever. In June 2013, Alcatel-Lucent announced its “Shift Plan”, which involves moving away from being a telecoms equipment generalist. They want to be a specialist in IP networking and mobile and fixed broadband access. Philippe Keryer, Alcatel-Lucent’s chief strategy, and innovation officer said in a statement:

Undersea fiber-optic transmission is integral to the digital economy, delivering vast amounts of video and data between countries, regions and continents. As our customers cope with increasing demand on their networks for data capacity and higher-speeds of transmission, our researchers are intensifying their application with tests like this to develop new technology solutions to transform global data networks.

Wavelength division multiplexing (WDM)Mr. Meyer explains the test used Bell Labs’s technique for squeezing 200Gbps through a single data channel. It used 155 lasers, each one carrying 200Gbps at a different frequency. This represents an enhancement to the wavelength division multiplexing (WDM) techniques that run at up to 100Gbps in today’s commercially deployed cable.

Normally such signals suffer from distortions and noise, which limit performance. But GigaOM understands that Alcatel-Lucent was able to resolve this by using an enhanced version of WDM. The enhanced WDM works by splitting light up into different wavelengths so that it can carry more data.

Long-haul high-speed networking

Increasing bandwidthThe pace of development in the long-haul high-speed networking field is impressive. It’s easy to see just how far we’ve come. GigaOM provided a quick look at some of the other recent developments in long-haul high-speed networking.

  • May 2011 a team of German, UK, and Swiss scientists successfully used Orthogonal Frequency-Division Multiplexing (OFDM) to send data at a rate of 26Tbps over a 50km long single-mode fiber optic cable.
  • January 2012 a Japanese team working out of NEC successfully transmitted 4Tbps over a single “ultra-long haul” (10,000km) fiber optic cable without repeaters by making use of WDM just like Alcatel-Lucent.
  • May 2013 a more exotic approach with the UK test of hollow fiber optic cable that delivered speeds of 73.7 Tbps.

rb-

Remember that the NSA has a submarine, the USS Jimmy Carter designed to tap undersea telecom cables on the bottom of the sea. This new speed record could be used to spy on more people.

 The Undersea Cables that Connect the World

Related articles

Ralph Bach has been in IT long enough to know better and has blogged from his Bach Seat about IT, careers, and anything else that catches his attention since 2005. You can follow him on LinkedInFacebook, and Twitter. Email the Bach Seat here.