Thursday, April 30, 2015
Saturday, April 25, 2015
Wednesday, April 22, 2015
Tuesday, April 21, 2015
CyberArk Breaks Out As Security Group Rallies CYBR PANW QLYS - Investors.com
CyberArk Breaks Out As Security Group Rallies - Investors.com
$FTNT
$CYBR
$PANW
$QLYS
Read More At Investor's Business Daily: http://news.investors.com/technology/042115-748847-cyberark-stock-breaks-out-security-software-group-rally.htm#ixzz3Y0O8n9ZU
Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook
$FTNT
$CYBR
$PANW
$QLYS
CyberArk Software shares are making a big move on the stock market today as the Security-Software industry group rallies. Late Monday, group peer Fortinet (NASDAQ:FTNT) posted its biggest quarterly billings growth since its IPO in 2009. Fortinet has an IBD Composite Rating of 84 out of 99, and it gapped up to a new high on Tuesday.
CyberArk (NASDAQ:CYBR) has a 99 Composite Rating. It also gapped up on Tuesday, clearing a 63.08 buy point from a cup-with-handle base.
Palo Alto Networks (NYSE:PANW) and Qualys (NASDAQ:QLYS) also have 99 Composite Ratings. Palo Alto shares hit a new high, while Qualys is trading about 3% below a high set earlier this month.
Watch this video for IBD chart analysis of CyberArk. Is the stock still in buy range?
Follow Alissa Williams on Twitter: @IBD_AWilliams
Read More At Investor's Business Daily: http://news.investors.com/technology/042115-748847-cyberark-stock-breaks-out-security-software-group-rally.htm#ixzz3Y0O8n9ZU
Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook
Meet 4 IBD 50 Companies Reporting Earnings This Week UA ORLY MANH - Investors.com
Meet 4 IBD 50 Companies Reporting Earnings This Week UA ORLY MANH - Investors.com
Meet 4 IBD 50 Companies Reporting Earnings This Week
$MANH
$NKE
$UA
$ORLY
$BIIB
$AZO
Meet 4 IBD 50 Companies Reporting Earnings This Week
$MANH
$NKE
$UA
$ORLY
$BIIB
$AZO
Saturday, April 18, 2015
Security Now 503: Your Questions, Steve's Answers 210
Published on Apr 14, 2015
Hosts: Steve Gibson with Mike Elgan
The EFF wins its Podcast Patent Challenge, an update on CNNIC's root certificates, the Mac "Rootpipe" vulnerability, more viewer questions and Steve's Answers!
The EFF wins its Podcast Patent Challenge, an update on CNNIC's root certificates, the Mac "Rootpipe" vulnerability, more viewer questions and Steve's Answers!
Monday, April 13, 2015
Blackphone
Source: Blackphone
A Phone That’s More Than Just Smart
With the seemingly endless headlines about data loss and thefts, maintaining your privacy can feel overwhelming. That’s why we created Blackphone to be a secure starting point for your professional and proprietary communications. It combines a fortified Android operating system with a suite of apps designed to keep your enterprise and personal information private.
List Converter Tools
Source: List Converter Tools
List Converter
Tools
Tools
IE Users Click Here To Bookmark This Page (Ctrl+D)
Convert any vertical list of stocks or stock ticker symbols to a horizontal list
OR
Convert a horizontal list to vertical for
easy copy/paste into your stock streamer or scanner.
Our handy Stock List Converter Tool, developed by a stock market forum buddy of mine,
will save you countless hours of typing stock ticker symbols.
Just paste up to 10,000 stock ticker symbols in the box, click Enter and copy the results.
ATTENTION WEBMASTERS AND STOCK FORUM MODERATORS
Feel free to post a link to this page.
Your visitors and members will really appreciate it.
Don't forget to check out our other pages
listed in the Table of Contents over to the left
OR
Convert a horizontal list to vertical for
easy copy/paste into your stock streamer or scanner.
Our handy Stock List Converter Tool, developed by a stock market forum buddy of mine,
will save you countless hours of typing stock ticker symbols.
Just paste up to 10,000 stock ticker symbols in the box, click Enter and copy the results.
ATTENTION WEBMASTERS AND STOCK FORUM MODERATORS
Feel free to post a link to this page.
Your visitors and members will really appreciate it.
Don't forget to check out our other pages
listed in the Table of Contents over to the left
Cups w/ Handles - Douglas Gregory - Public ChartList - StockCharts.com
Source: Cups w/ Handles - Douglas Gregory - Public ChartList - StockCharts.com
Click Here For Charts Of Our Cups w/ Handles At Stockcharts w/ Multiple Indicators
ALJ,AMPE,AST,BUD,BWC,CCO,CLGX,DOC,EGHT,GLT,GNTX,
GRUB,HF,HIG,JUNO,KTWO,LBMH,LYB,M,MAN,MFRM,
MTX,NATI,NNA,PLCE,PRCP,RDY,SBCF,TFM,XRS
Click Here For Charts 1
Click Here For Charts 2
Click Here For Charts 3
Click Here For Charts Of Our Cups w/ Handles At Stockcharts w/ Multiple IndicatorsALJ,AMPE,AST,BUD,BWC,CCO,CLGX,DOC,EGHT,GLT,GNTX,
GRUB,HF,HIG,JUNO,KTWO,LBMH,LYB,M,MAN,MFRM,
MTX,NATI,NNA,PLCE,PRCP,RDY,SBCF,TFM,XRS
Click Here For Charts 1
Click Here For Charts 2
Click Here For Charts 3
Wednesday, April 8, 2015
Insecure Passwords or Insecure People? - Infosecurity Magazine
Source: Insecure Passwords or Insecure People? - Infosecurity Magazine
Richard Walters GM/VP, Identity and Access Management, Intermedia
For all the talk about multi-factor authentication and the mainstream adoption of biometrics, passwords are not going away. Whilst there are more secure alternatives, and other authentication methods that can be used alongside the humble password, like it or not, the password is going to be around for a long time.
More focus is needed on how to make passwords ‘work’. For the vast majority of applications, they’re all we’ve got.
The truth is that there’s nothing wrong with passwords. The problem is people. Users select passwords that are too simple, too short and too predictable.
Analysis of actual passwords published after large-scale attacks (including Sony and LinkedIn) shows that more than 50% are fewer than eight characters. Half contain only numbers or only letters, and only about 1% contain a non-alphanumeric character.
Cracking more than 80% of user-selected passwords is relatively easy. Even if salted and hashed, a high percentage will still be susceptible to brute-force attacks; the time needed to obtain the passwords becomes purely a function of the compute power available to the hacker.
To make things worse (for themselves), users reuse the same passwords across different systems and services. Attackers who gain access to one service can then sign in freely to email, social media, online shopping and even mobile phone and bank accounts. Despite attempts to educate people on the importance of using relatively long, complex, random and unique strings, they don’t. And they rarely change them.
So what if we could improve the way in which passwords are implemented and take responsibility for selecting and changing them regularly away from the user entirely? Security – and the user experience – would be improved significantly.
Password management solutions are not new and fall broadly into two categories.
Firstly, there are consumer password managers that help individuals create, store and recall passwords, but still rely on the user to change them regularly. Users still know what their passwords to systems and services are.
Secondly, there are SSO solutions that cater to the needs of enterprises and the applications they use. Whilst SSO solutions cover major business applications that support federated identity standards, they often don’t support the thousands of non-standard, smaller web applications.
If an SSO solution can automate the selection and changing of passwords – and ensure that passwords are not only as long and strong as the applications will support but also unique across all accounts – then the inherent human weakness is minimized or eliminated.
This moves passwords closer to the tokens and assertions that are used in federated identity and authentication standards, including SAML and WS-Federation. Pre-defined trust between the identity provider and service provider, typically based on a shared certificate, is mimicked by either having the user enter their current (initial) password so that the SSO solution can subsequently change it, or the SSO solution may provision the account and set the password from the outset.
There is a secondary benefit to improving the strength and uniqueness of credentials on individual user accounts.
A significant percentage of large-scale breaches share something in common. According to the Verizon 2014 Data Breach Investigations Report, two-thirds of breaches exploit weak or stolen passwords – compared to 76% in 2013. Perhaps education is starting to have an effect after all.
The attack on JP Morgan affecting 75 million customer accounts started with the compromise of an employee’s username and password for a ‘web development server’. In the now well-documented anatomy of an attack, once initial access had been gained, the attackers escalated privilege, obtaining credentials to further administrative accounts to eventually affect the large-scale theft.
If automated password management had been applied to these administrative accounts, then the passwords would have been stronger and taken longer to obtain, with a higher likelihood that they would have been changed before being used. Likewise, if customer account passwords were also auto-generated, unique and changed frequently, their value to hackers would have been lower.
The risk of experiencing a data breach is now higher than ever. Removing human interaction with passwords and automating their selection and change is a major step forward on several levels. It protects the individual by ensuring that when the next large scale breach occurs the password stolen is unique and not reused across multiple services and – if applied to internal accounts on internal systems – may slow down the attacker and even prevent the breach from happening at all.
Richard Walters GM/VP, Identity and Access Management, Intermedia
For all the talk about multi-factor authentication and the mainstream adoption of biometrics, passwords are not going away. Whilst there are more secure alternatives, and other authentication methods that can be used alongside the humble password, like it or not, the password is going to be around for a long time.
More focus is needed on how to make passwords ‘work’. For the vast majority of applications, they’re all we’ve got.
The truth is that there’s nothing wrong with passwords. The problem is people. Users select passwords that are too simple, too short and too predictable.
Analysis of actual passwords published after large-scale attacks (including Sony and LinkedIn) shows that more than 50% are fewer than eight characters. Half contain only numbers or only letters, and only about 1% contain a non-alphanumeric character.
Cracking more than 80% of user-selected passwords is relatively easy. Even if salted and hashed, a high percentage will still be susceptible to brute-force attacks; the time needed to obtain the passwords becomes purely a function of the compute power available to the hacker.
To make things worse (for themselves), users reuse the same passwords across different systems and services. Attackers who gain access to one service can then sign in freely to email, social media, online shopping and even mobile phone and bank accounts. Despite attempts to educate people on the importance of using relatively long, complex, random and unique strings, they don’t. And they rarely change them.
So what if we could improve the way in which passwords are implemented and take responsibility for selecting and changing them regularly away from the user entirely? Security – and the user experience – would be improved significantly.
Password management solutions are not new and fall broadly into two categories.
Firstly, there are consumer password managers that help individuals create, store and recall passwords, but still rely on the user to change them regularly. Users still know what their passwords to systems and services are.
Secondly, there are SSO solutions that cater to the needs of enterprises and the applications they use. Whilst SSO solutions cover major business applications that support federated identity standards, they often don’t support the thousands of non-standard, smaller web applications.
If an SSO solution can automate the selection and changing of passwords – and ensure that passwords are not only as long and strong as the applications will support but also unique across all accounts – then the inherent human weakness is minimized or eliminated.
This moves passwords closer to the tokens and assertions that are used in federated identity and authentication standards, including SAML and WS-Federation. Pre-defined trust between the identity provider and service provider, typically based on a shared certificate, is mimicked by either having the user enter their current (initial) password so that the SSO solution can subsequently change it, or the SSO solution may provision the account and set the password from the outset.
There is a secondary benefit to improving the strength and uniqueness of credentials on individual user accounts.
A significant percentage of large-scale breaches share something in common. According to the Verizon 2014 Data Breach Investigations Report, two-thirds of breaches exploit weak or stolen passwords – compared to 76% in 2013. Perhaps education is starting to have an effect after all.
The attack on JP Morgan affecting 75 million customer accounts started with the compromise of an employee’s username and password for a ‘web development server’. In the now well-documented anatomy of an attack, once initial access had been gained, the attackers escalated privilege, obtaining credentials to further administrative accounts to eventually affect the large-scale theft.
If automated password management had been applied to these administrative accounts, then the passwords would have been stronger and taken longer to obtain, with a higher likelihood that they would have been changed before being used. Likewise, if customer account passwords were also auto-generated, unique and changed frequently, their value to hackers would have been lower.
The risk of experiencing a data breach is now higher than ever. Removing human interaction with passwords and automating their selection and change is a major step forward on several levels. It protects the individual by ensuring that when the next large scale breach occurs the password stolen is unique and not reused across multiple services and – if applied to internal accounts on internal systems – may slow down the attacker and even prevent the breach from happening at all.
Threats - Symantec Corp.
Source: Threats - Symantec Corp.
Accurate and up-to-date information on the latest threats. A Threat is an application with the potential to cause harm to a system in the form of destruction, disclosure, data modification, and/or Denial of Service (DoS).
Accurate and up-to-date information on the latest threats. A Threat is an application with the potential to cause harm to a system in the form of destruction, disclosure, data modification, and/or Denial of Service (DoS).
| Severity | Name | Type | Protected* |
 | Backdoor.Drivdrop | Trojan | 04/08/2015 |
| Trojan.Cryptolocker.P | Trojan | 04/05/2015 |
| Infostealer.Tiqueb!g1 | Trojan | 04/04/2015 |
| Infostealer.Staem | Trojan | 04/02/2015 |
| Infostealer.Teskilog | Trojan | 04/02/2015 |
| Infostealer.Tiquebou | Trojan | 04/02/2015 |
| Infostealer.Staem!gm | Trojan | 04/02/2015 |
| Trojan.Gootkit!sdb | Trojan | 04/01/2015 |
| Trojan.Cryptolock!g10 | Trojan | 04/01/2015 |
| W97M.Downloader.B | Trojan | 04/01/2015 |
| Backdoor.Weecnaw | Trojan | 04/01/2015 |
| W32.Dompie | Worm | 03/31/2015 |
| Infostealer.Chabibase | Trojan | 03/24/2015 |
| Trojan.Bisonal | Trojan | 04/01/2015 |
| Trojan.Explod | Trojan | 03/30/2015 |
| Trojan.Pengdoloder | Trojan | 03/30/2015 |
| Trojan.Explod!g1 | Trojan | 03/30/2015 |
| Trojan.Explod!g2 | Trojan | 03/30/2015 |
| Trojan.Explod!g3 | Trojan | 03/30/2015 |
| Downloader.Pengdoloder | Trojan | 03/30/2015 |
| Trojan.Paramcud | Trojan | 03/30/2015 |
| Trojan.Rloader.B!g2 | Trojan | 03/28/2015 |
| VBS.Cozer.B | Trojan | 03/27/2015 |
| VBS.Cozer | Trojan | 03/27/2015 |
| Trojan.Ransomlk.AP!inf | Trojan | 03/27/2015 |
| Exp.CVE-2015-0323 | Trojan | 03/28/2015 |
| Exp.CVE-2015-0325 | Trojan | 03/28/2015 |
| Exp.CVE-2015-0326 | Trojan | 03/28/2015 |
| Exp.CVE-2015-0328 | Trojan | 03/28/2015 |
| Trojan.Fareit!gm | Trojan | 03/26/2015 |
| JS.Downloader!gen1 | Trojan | 03/26/2015 |
| Backdoor.Wofeksad | Trojan | 03/24/2015 |
| Infostealer.Dyre!gm | Trojan | 03/24/2015 |
| Downloader.Eitenckay | Trojan | 03/24/2015 |
| SONAR.SuspTempRun2 | Trojan, Virus, Worm | 03/24/2015 |
| SONAR.SuspBeh!gen19 | Trojan, Virus, Worm | 03/24/2015 |
| SONAR.Zbot!gen6 | Trojan, Worm | 03/24/2015 |
| Android.Lockscreen | Trojan | 03/23/2015 |
| Trojan.Miuref.B | Trojan | 03/24/2015 |
| Trojan.Ransomcrypt.R | Trojan | 03/20/2015 |
| Bloodhound.Flash.30 | Trojan | 03/21/2015 |
| Exp.CVE-2015-0336 | Trojan | 03/21/2015 |
| Android.Cajino | Trojan | 03/20/2015 |
| Trojan.Dogarat | Trojan | 03/19/2015 |
| Infostealer.Posfind | Trojan | 03/20/2015 |
| Trojan.Inflabot | Trojan | 03/18/2015 |
| Trojan.Navedri | Trojan | 03/18/2015 |
| Backdoor.Dino | Trojan | 03/17/2015 |
| Trojan.Seadask | Trojan | 03/17/2015 |
| Trojan.Boscan | Trojan | 03/17/2015 |
| Trojan.Cozer!gen4 | Trojan | 03/17/2015 |
| Trojan.Mdropper!gen3 | Trojan | 03/17/2015 |
| Trojan.Wifaper | Trojan | 03/17/2015 |
| Backdoor.Bezigate | Trojan | 03/17/2015 |
| Solimba!gen1 | 03/12/2015 | |
| Exp.CVE-2015-0097 | Trojan | 03/11/2015 |
| Bloodhound.RTF.3 | Trojan | 03/11/2015 |
| Backdoor.Mapafes | Trojan | 03/11/2015 |
| Trojan.Gotalon | Trojan | 03/10/2015 |
| Packed.Generic.484 | Trojan | 03/10/2015 |
| W32.Tempedreve.E!inf | Virus, Worm | 03/10/2015 |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
BookMark
