Cyberattack on lawyers in China software piracy case

A Shanghai woman sits at a computer to use censored internet in a internet café. China has been scrutinized over serious alleged cyberattacks against a California law firm as well as human rights activists in a claim made by Google. - AFP PHOTO

SAN FRANCISCO: US lawyers are suing China for 2.2 billion dollars in an Internet censoring software piracy case, reports AFP. Attorneys at the California law firm Gipson, Hoffman, & Pancione said that on Monday they began receiving “Trojan emails” crafted to trick them into opening files which were booby-trapped with malicious software code.
“Trojan emails are specially constructed to retrieve data from the target’s computer and often allows the sender to gain access to the target’s computer or to the company’s servers,” the firm stated in a release.
“It has not yet been determined whether any of the attempts were successful.”
The law firm last week filed a lawsuit on behalf of Cybersitter accusing China of using the California company's copyrighted software censorship programs being mandated for computers sold in that country.
The suit contends that markers of the program - known as Green Dam - pirated more than 3,000 lines of computer code from a Cybersitter Internet filtering program marketed to parents interested in limiting where children roam online.
Lenovo and Acer are among the computer makers named as defendants in legal paperwork that claims more than 56 million copies of Green Dam software with pirated code have been distributed.
“Cyberattacks were initiated from within China against Cybersitter itself last June when the Green Dam piracy was first reported in the press,” said the law firm.
While the source of the email “spearphishing” attack aimed at lawyers has yet to be found, it appeared to originate in China, according to the company.
The news came a day after Google vowed to stop bowing to Chinese Internet censors and risk banishment from the lucrative market to protest “highly sophisticated” cyberattacks aimed at Chinese human rights activists.
The recent online assaults at Google, Adobe and dozens of other firms appear to have been part of an ongoing campaign to steal precious source codes and track human rights activists some experts have said.
China-based cyber spies struck the Internet giant and reportedly more than 30 other unidentified firms in an apparent bid for computer source codes, intellectual property, and information about activists around the world.
Tactics included tricking computer users with ruses and ploys referred to as “social engineering.” Cyber spies apparently selectively targeted workers with emails crafted to appear as though they came from bosses or colleagues. Messages included attached files rigged with malicious software.
When bogus messages were opened, computers were infected with hidden programs which could swipe information, seize control of machines, or create “back doors” for unauthorized access to files.
The Internet giant did not specifically accuse the Chinese government of being behind the cyberattacks.
But China is being eyed as the probable culprit due to the sophistication of the attacks, the targets, and the fact the assaults originated in that region. –AFP

Indian Minister slams UN body on glacier research

The IPCC claim that glaciers will vanish by 2035 was not based on an iota of scientific evidence,” said Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh. “The IPCC has to do a lot of answering on how it reached the 2035 figure, which created such a scare.” - AP Photo

NEW DELHI: India’s Environment Minister slammed the UN’s top climate experts’ comments claiming its doomsday warning about the Himalayan glaciers was not based on “scientific evidence.”
The controversy focuses on a reference in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) landmark 2007 report that states the chances of Himalayan glaciers “disappearing by the year 2035 and perhaps sooner is very high.”
“The IPCC claim that glaciers will vanish by 2035 was not based on an iota of scientific evidence,” said Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh. “The IPCC has to do a lot of answering on how it reached the 2035 figure, which created such a scare.”
On Monday, the IPCC's chairman, Rajendra Pachauri, said the panel would review the 2035 figure.
Ramesh said he felt “vindicated” after repeatedly challenging the IPCC's work on glaciers. He believes there is no “conclusive scientific evidence” linking global warming to the melting of glaciers.
In November, Ramesh backed a study by Indian scientists which supported his view, prompting Pachauri to label his support “arrogant.” The Nobel-winning IPCC is already under attack over hacked email exchanges which skeptics say reflected attempts to skew the evidence for global warming, reports AFP
The new dispute has boosted climate skeptics, who have questioned scientific evidence behind global warming in the past and especially after a scandal last month dubbed “climategate.” Emails from scientists at Britain's University of East Anglia, the top centre for climate research, were leaked and seized by skeptics as evidence that experts twisted data in order to dramatise global warming.
Ramesh conceded that “most glaciers are in a poor state,” but said they were receding at different rates and a few were even advancing.

Govt in a fix over oil pricing mechanism

The govt has been finding it difficult to offset more than Rs25bn losses reportedly faced by the refining industry and at the same time provide relief to consumers as desired by the Supreme Court. - File photo

ISLAMABAD: The government is in a fix about revising the oil pricing mechanism for the benefit of consumers as desired by the Supreme Court, because proposals made by independent experts remain short of pulling the refining industry out of heavy losses.

According to sources, a committee of experts on oil pricing constituted by the government on the instructions of the apex court will meet again on Tuesday to examine a formula presented by an ‘independent expert’ and proposals by the refining industry to break a logjam over refining profits and revision of pricing mechanism for oil products.

The Supreme Court had fixed a deadline of Dec 30, 2009, for the committee to remove lacunae in the oil pricing formula, but later de-listed for an indefinite period the hearing of the case scheduled for Dec 31.

The head of the committee, Petroleum Secretary Mahmood Salim Mahmood, is set to retire early next month.

These sources said that Raziuddin, a former chief executive of the Attock Refinery, who had been engaged by the committee of experts to suggest amendments to the oil pricing formula, had presented a sliding scale of $1.5 to $5 per barrel refining fee proportionate to the paid up capital of refineries to ensure viable margins.

Mr Raziuddin was also co-opted by the Justice Bhagwandas Commission when it probed irregularities in the oil pricing system on the instructions of the apex court.

The recommendations, said the sources, were handed over to the refining industry for feedback. The industry rejected the proposals and said they did not provide financial room for profit.

It claimed that even if deregulated products like liquefied petroleum gas, lubes and bitumen were included in calculations, the formula presented by the independent expert would not end the losses.

These sources said that the committee had unanimously clarified at the outset that the formula would be based on efficient refining operations and competitiveness.

The government has been finding it difficult to offset more than Rs25 billion losses reportedly faced by the refining industry over the past four months because of furnace oil production and at the same time provide relief to consumers.

The sources said the refineries produced about 34-40 per cent of furnace oil from crude refining. Since furnace oil is considered a low value-added product, its prices remain less than that of crude oil. The refineries usually earn their profits through difference between the prices of crude oil and diesel which stood at $15-18 per barrel over the past decade under a faulty formula introduced by the former government.

Now the difference between the prices of crude oil and diesel has come down to $3 per barrel.

The refineries have informed the committee that they cannot sustain their operations beyond January and whatever formula the government plans to put in place should ensure that their losses are recovered and future operations become commercially viable.

Under the options proposed by the independent expert, the refineries would have to close down their operations and the government would have to rely on import of all petroleum products, exposing the national exchequer to heavy outflow of foreign exchange and putting burden on the infrastructure that would not be able to sustain transportation of oil products across the country.

The sources said the ministry of finance had told the committee that reduction in petroleum levy or general sales tax could not be considered because of the IMF programme.

The committee had told the ministry that the only way to provide any long-term relief on oil prices was to fix per litre general sales tax on petroleum products instead of the 16 per cent rate and reduction or elimination of the petroleum development levy (PDL). The apex court had termed the levy double taxation.