Search the Community

Product Description CloudBerry Box provides bi-directional synchronization of data across remote computers. Synchronization between end-points is performed through your cloud storage account. No 3rd party services involved into data processing. Sync local content on several computers. All changes automatically apply across all end-points Use your own cloud storage account to synchronize data on remote computers. Amazon S3, Microsoft Azure, Google Cloud, Rackspace and other. Download and install CloudBerry Box on all computers you want to synchronize. Set up your cloud storage account and specify local folder to store synchronized data on each of the machines. All changes made to the folder and contents will be automatically uploaded to the cloud and applied to all computers sharing access to the cloud storage account. All data moves through direct connections between end-points and your cloud storage account. No 3rd party web services involved in data transfers or processing. -> Download <-Deal Expire in:

When heat from one computer is emitted and detected by an adjacent computer, a channel can be opened that researchers are claiming can facilitate the spread of keys, passwords and even malware. According to researchers from the Cyber Security Research Center at Ben Gurion University in Israel, the bridge, something they’ve dubbed BitWhisper, can allow for communication between the two air-gapped machines. Researchers Mordechai Guri and Matan Munitz discovered the method and were overseen by Yuval Elovici, a professor at the school’s Department of Information Systems Engineering. The three plan to publish a paper on their research, “BitWhisper: Covert Signaling Channel between Air-Gapped Computers Using Thermal Manipulations,” soon. To connect two otherwise separate computers – a common sight in specialized computer labs, military networks, etc. – the channel relies on something the researchers call “thermal pings,” the repeated fusion of two networks via proximity and heat. This helps grant a bridge between the public network and the internal network. “At this stage, the attacker can communicate with the formerly isolated network, issuing commands and receiving responses,” the report reads. Once the airgap has been bridged, attackers can do a handful of things, including using the channel to spread keys, unleash a worm, send a command to an industrial control system, or spread malware to other parts of the network. “BitWhisper provides a feasible covert channel, suitable for delivering command and control (C&C) messages, and leaking short chunks of sensitive data such as passwords,” the paper warns. In a video posted to YouTube, the researchers demonstrate how they were able to send a command from one machine to another in order to reposition and then launch a small, toy missle: For their study the researchers positioned personal computers next to one another – side-by-side, back-to-back, even stacked on top of each other – to determine how quickly data traveled between the two. The researchers then ran the machines through a rigorous series of calculations and “busy loops” in order to get them to give off more heat. From there they were able to gauge which of the computers’ temperature sensors were affected by a difference in heat and in turn could be manipulated. Guri and company were left with a complicated attack environment that’s dependent upon multiple, highly-calibrated parameters being set in place in order to carry out an attack. It’s not the speediest method to transfer information – the thermal signal’s rate of change between computers can be slow – very slow – oftentimes taking several minutes to transfer just one signal; at the most, BitWhisper can process eight signals per hour. While slow, the team’s video helps illustrate that the mode of transfer is possible but it just may make more sense to transfer small bits of information. The attack requires no special hardware or additional components, it just requires that both machines are infected by malware. On top of that the channel is bi-directional, meaning the sender could be the receiver in some instances. The attack should work as long as one computer is producing heat and another is monitoring that heat. End-users who wanted to theoretically prevent an attack like this from happening could keep computers far apart from each other. While that may seem like the most sensible move, researchers stress it may be difficult. “Keeping minimal distances between computers is not practical,” the researchers said, “and obviously, managing physical distances between different networks has its complexity in terms of space and administration overheads that increases with every air-gap network used.” Guri and a trio of researchers found a technique last year to use FM waves for data exfiltration. Guri and his team presented the malicious program, AirHopper, at MALCON, a conference in Mumbai last year, and showed how it could be used to decode a radio signal sent from a computer’s video card. That attack helped clarify what is and isn’t possible when it comes to staging threats against air-gapped machines. The threat landscape is a field of great interest to researchers at the university. Going forward Guri states that he and his team are hoping to see if they can get two computers to send and receive information at the same time and to see if it’s possible to get two computers in the same room, giving off heat, to boost the channel’s effective transmission range. Source

OFF: Nu este marea cu sarea , dar totusi merge.. ON: PeerBlock lets you control who your computer "talks to" on the Internet. By selecting appropriate lists of "known bad" computers, you can block communication with advertising or spyware oriented servers, computers monitoring your p2p activities, computers which have been "hacked", even entire countries! They can't get in to your computer, and your computer won't try to send them anything either. And best of all, it's free! Source: PeerBlock â Peerblock Site Download: http://peerblock.googlecode.com/files/PeerBlock-Setup_v1.2_r693.exe

The federal government is seeking more legal power to step in and shut down botnets through an amendment to the existing criminal law, which would allow the Department of Justice to obtain injunctions to disrupt these malicious networks. The Obama administration has proposed an amendment to existing United Stated federal law that would give it a more powerful tool to go after botnets such as GameOver Zeus, Asprox and others. In recent years, Justice, along with private security firms and law enforcement agencies in Europe, have taken down various incarnations of a number of major botnets, including GameOver Zeus and Coreflood. These actions have had varying levels of success, with the GOZ takedown being perhaps the most effective, as it also had the effect of disrupting the infrastructure used by the CryptoLocker ransomware. As part of those takedown operations, the Department of Justice files civil lawsuits against alleged operators of the botnets, and sometimes their hosting providers, and also obtains injunctions that enable the government to sinkhole C2 servers or take physical control of those machines. Now, the administration would like to expand those powers. “One powerful tool that the department has used to disrupt botnets and free victim computers from criminal malware is the civil injunction process. Current law gives federal courts the authority to issue injunctions to stop the ongoing commission of specified fraud crimes or illegal wiretapping, by authorizing actions that prevent a continuing and substantial injury. This authority played a crucial role in the department’s successful disruption of the Coreflood botnet in 2011 and the Gameover Zeus botnet in 2014,” Leslie R. Caldwell, assistant attorney general in the criminal division at the Department of Justice, wrote in a blog post explaining the administration’s position. “The problem is that current law only permits courts to consider injunctions for limited crimes, including certain frauds and illegal wiretapping. Botnets, however, can be used for many different types of illegal activity. They can be used to steal sensitive corporate information, to harvest email account addresses, to hack other computers, or to execute DDoS attacks against web sites or other computers. Yet — depending on the facts of any given case — these crimes may not constitute fraud or illegal wiretapping. In those cases, courts may lack the statutory authority to consider an application by prosecutors for an injunction to disrupt the botnets in the same way that injunctions were successfully used to incapacitate the Coreflood and Gameover Zeus botnets.” In order to obtain an injunction in these cases, the government would need to sue the defendants in civil court and show that its suit is likely to succeed on its merits. “The Administration’s proposed amendment would add activities like the operation of a botnet to the list of offenses eligible for injunctive relief. Specifically, the amendment would permit the department to seek an injunction to prevent ongoing hacking violations in cases where 100 or more victim computers have been hacked. This numerical threshold focuses the injunctive authority on enjoining the creation, maintenance, operation, or use of a botnet, as well as other widespread attacks on computers using malicious software (such as “ransomware” ),” Caldwell wrote. One hundred machines is a low number for a botnet, and indeed would barely even qualify as a botnet in today’s environment, which includes many networks comprising hundreds of thousands or millions of compromised PCs. Mark Jaycox, a legislative analyst for the EFF, said that the proposal from the Obama administration may be overreaching. “The blog post posits that IP/trade secret concerns are reasons that are not already covered to take down botnets. That’s a civil/private context and we’ve seen private companies use the Lanham Act to handle that angle. Seems like the DOJ is pushing for a more expansive law. As of now, we’ve seen DOJ been able to handle takedowns with the resources and laws that are already provided to them,” Jaycox said. “We’d like to see a particular use case where they couldn’t use their already aggressive interpretation of the current law to take down botnets. If anything, we should be narrowing the current anti-hacking statute and computer laws because of their excessive breadth.” Source

C++ E-Books 1.Intermediate C++ Programming 2.Computers - Programming C++ - Reverse Engineering 3.Programming - Teach Yourself Visual C++ in 21 Days 4.Linux C++ Programming - How To 5.Addison Wesley - C++ by Dissection 6.An Introduction to Programming with C++ 7.Beginning Programming with C++ For Dummies 8.C++ Without Fear 9.Sams Teach You C++ in 24 Hours 10.Sybex C++ - No Experience Required 11.Thinking in C++ - Volume 1-2nd Edition Bruce Eckel 12.Thinking in C++ - Volume 2-2nd Edition Bruce Eckel 13.UnderstandingCppAnAccelerated Introduction To Be Continued... Download Link: http://www.mediafire.com/?fecm1bqhhcr47u4