3G Watchdog Pro Keeps Massive Data Charges at Bay

I used 19.7 MB in 10.7 hours at home doing nothing in particular -- no TV, no streaming music. I'm a prosumer geek savvy enough to know about data roaming costs, but imagine if I were an aging, yet still good-looking retiree on vacation with his first smartphone, roaming at AT&T's rack-rate of $0.0195 per kilobyte. That 19.7 MB of doing nothing in particular would cost $393.35. A petrifying thought.

3G Watchdog Pro, an app from Richard Gruet, is available for US$2.99 at Google Play.

With the preponderance of data quotas imposed by telcos on mobile phone usage and the rapid introduction of data-hogging apps -- in particular, those related to TV and music -- it may well be time to investigate counters.
Counters let you see how much data you're using, and warn you of potential overages.
Often, the only penalty for exceeding your provider's data allowance is a speed slowdown, which you may not notice when performing email and Web-browsing functions. However, you will notice that speed slowdown when watching TV apps, like Slingplayer, for example.
Some so-called unlimited plan carriers use bizarre euphemisms, like "fair use policy" to substantiate the slowdown, and then -- to add insult to injury -- don't let you buy more data until your next billing period.
In other cases, particularly when roaming overseas, data charges can be many dollars per megabyte, as soon as you touch down.
Getting walloped by a mega-bill or simply having your TV app-watching inexplicably curtailed are good reasons to become watchful of data use.
Richard Gruet, publisher of the Pro version of 3G Watchdog, a mobile data counter available for US$2.99 in the Google Play store, reckons his Android app goes some way toward guarding you against these onerous or expensive overages.

The App

First up, browsing 3G Watchdog Pro's installed app makes for a fascinating study. I learned right off the bat that I had used 19.7 MB in 10.7 hours at home doing nothing in particular -- in other words, without watching TV or listening to streaming music.
I'm a prosumer geek savvy enough to know about data roaming costs, but imagine if I were an aging, yet still good-looking retiree off on vacation with his first smartphone, roaming at AT&T's rack-rate of $0.0195 per kilobyte for some countries. That 19.7 MB of doing nothing in particular would cost $393.35. A petrifying thought.

Data Usage Prediction

At 19.7 MB for the half day, I was heading for a theoretical overage at my test-assigned quota of 1 GB for the month. It's a simple matter to allocate a quota budget of, say 1 GB for the month, with a simple dropdown and text box.
Advanced data usage prediction, which is included in the paid version of the app, told me how much I needed to reduce my usage to stay within my limits. A Usage by Application feature let me see which apps were using the most data. A newspaper download and network location were two copious data users.
I was also able to see which apps used any data at all. The most basic of apps were using it, according to 3G Watchdog Pro, if in small amounts. Taxi Magic, a taxi booking app, used 3.4 KB despite my not going anywhere.

Rules, Upgrading

Rules and options are comprehensive. If your mobile operator counts in blocks and rounds up, you can set that as an option.
Having previously used the free version, I liked the way I could import that data into the paid version to take advantage of usage prediction and application usage features not available in the free version.

Possible Issues

I experienced no issues whatsoever; however, there have been reports of some devices not counting properly.
Gruet is forthcoming with device-based anomalies and lists them at the Google Play app page. It would be worth perusing that page before forking over any cash.
Gruet makes the perfectly legitimate point that there are more than 700 potential devices, so some ain't going to work. Again, I had no problems.

In Conclusion

For TV streamers burning through a megabyte a minute, and for international roaming travelers not on a roaming plan, this is a must-have app.
Even if you're neither, it makes for fascinating smartphone scrutiny.

Court Gives Microsoft License to Kill Botnet

After discovering that counterfeit versions of Windows containing malware were being installed and sold on new PCs in China, Microsoft tracked down the host of the botnet at its source and asked a US court for permission to try a new tactic. The court approved, giving Microsoft the OK to take over the entire ISP that hosted the botnet.

Microsoft won court approval to pursue cybercriminals infiltrating its supply chain as part of an ongoing investigation into malware-infected computers.

The company's Digital Crimes Unit bought computers from PC malls in China only to find brand-new laptop and desktop computers infected with preinstalled malware that may have spread to millions of PCs around the world.
Some of the devices contained counterfeit copies of Windows XP or Windows 7 with inactive malware. Another, though, was infected with the Nitol virus, which can open up a device to be used in a botnet attack.

They Are Watching

Further investigation, conducted under the codename "Operating b70," found 500 strains of malware hosted on more than 70,000 sub-domains, according to a company blog post about the study. Microsoft warned the malware could act by turning on a camera to spy on victims or track user key strokes to record personal information.
Microsoft's investigation stemmed from concerns about insecure supply chains. Researchers found that twenty percent of the PCs they purchased from the infiltrated supply chains had malware that could be spread through removable media such as USB flash drives.
While supply chains may have been hit by cybercriminals in the past, it wasn't always as possible to track the attacks that far back, said Michael Murray, managing partner of MAD Security.
"There have been counterfeit versions of Windows for as long as Windows has existed," he told TechNewsWorld. "And those counterfeit versions have often included some form of malware. It's only now that malware is controlled in a centralized fashion that this type of operation can exist. In prior times, when the supply chain was infiltrated by malicious software, it would spread organically, without any way of tracking the infections back to the source."
Microsoft did not respond to our request for further detail on the story.

Taking Matters Into Their Own Hands

The company discovered the virus was hosted on 3322.org, a domain that had been linked to malicious activity since 2008. To go after the cybercriminals, Microsoft's legal team filed a civil complaint against the owner of the domain, Peng Yong, and his company, Changzhou Bei Te Kang Mu Software Technology, or Bitcomm.
The U.S. District Court in Virginia awarded Microsoft the right to take over the domain, thus blocking the spread of the Nitol botnet and an additional 70,000 malicious subdomains, and allowed the legitimate subdomains to continue business without disruption.
The company said the threat of cyber attacks was a real one and it would continue to combat the spread of malware whatever way it could. That attitude, and the court's thumbs up giving Microsoft permission to take control of 3222.org, is an indication that law enforcement officials are recognizing the growing threat of cybercrime, said Murray.
"While it is encouraging that the response is taken somewhat seriously by the legal system, Microsoft didn't take control of a single domain -- they took control of a dynamic DNS system that hosts a huge number of legitimate customers," he said.
A comprehensive cybersecurity bill was recently debated in Congress as well, and although it didn't pass, it brought the debate of the court's involvement in fighting cyber attacks, said David Segal, executive director of Demand Progress.
"There's a newly empowered base of Internet activists across the United States, and alongside us stands a newly-strengthened corps of pro-privacy senators," he told TechNewsWorld.

Other Side of the Coin

But that could have significant consequences for the way the courts work with tech companies to battle cybercriminals, said Murray, noting that it would look different if the situation were reversed.
"Imagine the hypothetical that an American ISP became infected and an overseas software vendor got a court order in their country to shut down the domain name for that ISP, leaving all of the customers stranded. It wouldn't be looked at nearly as favorably by the security community."
Aside from the consequences, though, it's a growing reminder that consumers can't be too careful when purchasing electronics. In addition to fighting the spread of the malware, Microsoft offers a support site with tools for analyzing and cleaning infected devices. For customers looking to purchase a new Microsoft computer, Murray has advice.
"Buy legitimate software from legitimate hardware vendors and ensure that they run the appropriate end-point protections," he said.

Android Climbs Into Cloud-Based Desktop Computer

The Cloud Broadband is a hybrid device -- part tablet, part all-in-one desktop and part HD television. It's being tested in China and there are no plans as of yet to introduce the device or something like it in the United States. Still, the thing -- whatever it is -- is generating a good deal of interest.

Motorola Mobility has introduced a desktop all-in-one computer running the Android operating system. The Cloud Broadband is being launched in China in partnership with WASU Digital Group.

Motorola's Android-driven desktop,
the Cloud Broadband

(click image to enlarge)

The device is being touted to Chinese consumers as a combination of an HD digital TV with live and on-demand capability, and a touchscreen tablet/PC running Android, according to the Google Translate version of the Chinese text on the product's Chinese launch page.
Motorola is offering the device with access to services from Chinese cable TV and digital broadcasting operator China Digital Media.
Snappy Processor
The Motorola Cloud Broadband runs on a Freescale i.MX53 processor, which is based on an ARM Cortex A8 1 GHz core.
It has 1 GB of DDR RAM and 4 GB of NAND flash memory.
The Motorola Cloud Broadband runs Android 2.3.4 and has an 18.5-inch LED display with a resolution of 1366 x 768 pixels. It's claimed to be a TV and video client and be integrated with a variety of gadgets.

Say What, Now?

The Cloud Broadband's claimed plethora of capabilities has analysts puzzled.
"This looks more like an Android all-in-one (AIO) computer or large or fixed device than a connected TV," Michael Inouye, a senior analyst at ABI Research, told TechNewsWorld.
The Cloud Broadband ships with a wireless keyboard and mouse, and the 18.5-inch screen "better suits a computing arrangement than a TV, although it could be positioned as a tabletop TV, perhaps in the kitchen," Inouye continued. "It also seems to leverage cloud services more than traditional TV content, and I think the tie-in with China Digital TV Media gives it the TV flavor."
"Given the increasing convergence of all consumer electronic devices, it's hard to define something in a clean form nowadays," Jia Wu, a research director at Strategy Analytics, remarked. "In my opinion, it is an Android smart TV with a more intimate experience, meaning closer interaction between the user and the screen."
The Cloud Broadband "is really a convergence of PCs, TVs and smartphones," Wu told TechNewsWorld. " TCL and Tencent also announced a similar product called "iCE Screen" lately."
iCE Screen, described as the world's first large-screen mobile intelligent cloud product, was demoed in August at IFA 2012.
Motorola Mobility did not respond to our request to elaborate.

Potenital Markets

The Cloud Broadband is being offered in China but is likely to also be shipped to Hong Kong and Taiwan, ABI's Wu suggested. He wouldn't completely rule out the possibility of the device's being offered in the United States, but "Motorola is clearly using the Chinese market to test the waters."
However, Inouye doesn't think the Cloud Broadband will be offered in the US because "computer ownership is high, and Android for many would be too limited as a full computing platform."
Further, in the US, "it would gain little traction and be a difficult sell," Inouye remarked. "Recall the Verizon Hub, which was a media phone, but sought to aggregate a lot of functions in one small screened device and it failed."

Another Google Foot in the Door?

The question of whether or not Motorola is acting as a front in yet another attempt by Google to break into the burgeoning home entertainment market has been raised.
Google "has a number of 'ins' into the home entertainment market, [but] it still has a ways to go," ABI's Inouye said. " Google TV still has UI and content issues. The Nexus Q was priced way too high, kudos to Google for pulling it before its launch."
Still, it's unlikely that the Cloud Broadband is a covert attack on the home entertainment market from Google because "Google just bought Motorola and products like this have to be in planning for a year and a half," Bob O'Donnell, a program vice president at IDC, said. "I think this was under way well before the purchase."

Twitter Wins The Case !!

Twitter apparently could no longer take the heat. It gave up its efforts to keep an Occupy Wall Street protestor's tweets out of a criminal court case and forked them over to avoid being found in contempt. Privacy was at the heart of its resistance, but "a privacy claim is quite dubious and indefensible here," said Greg Sterling of Sterling Market Research.

Despite pending appeals, on Friday Twitter handed over an Occupy Wall Street protestor's tweets to a New York criminal court judge. The capitulation comes after months of attempts by the social networking company to fight a subpoena from prosecutors by claiming that that micro-blog posts were private conversations.

The case involves protestor Malcolm Harris, who was one of hundreds arrested during a mass protest on the Brooklyn Bridge last October. The Manhattan district attorney's office sought to obtain the tweets, which are no longer available online, arguing that the messages would contradict Harris' defense that police lead protestors onto the bridge's roadway only to arrest them for obstructing traffic.
Since the subpoena, Harris and Twitter have waged legal battles with New York, citing privacy issues.
Twitter did not respond to our request for further details.

Social Is Not Private

The key issue in this particular turn of events essentially boils down to the argument that social media is exactly what it sounds like -- that is, "social" doesn't mean "private."
"Twitter is like the public square in which users broadcast themselves from their soap boxes," said Josh Crandall, principal analyst for NetPop Research.
"It's very much a public medium, and users are generally aware of the dynamics. Protesters are using it exactly because it is a public forum through which they may rally support," he maintained.
"If somebody is using Twitter to organize illegal or violent activities, law enforcement should have the ability to subpoena the communications," Crandall told TechNewsWorld.
The tweets don't even have to be about illegal activities -- this is yet another example of the law and technology not being on the same page.
"The argument of privacy hasn't been tested," said Alan Webber, industry analyst and managing partner at the Altimeter Group.
"Twitter is a broadcast platform. So I don't know what grounds they have to stand on legally, especially as this is a criminal case," he told TechNewsWorld. "So that's a different threshold."

Privacy Debate

While Twitter has complied, Harris' lawyer, Martin Solar, reportedly said he was disappointed by the social media company's decision and vowed to continue to challenge the judge's order.
Judge Matthew Sciarrino overstepped his authority, Solar has claimed.
Is that a valid defense or just posturing? Given that the messages likely were seen by many on Twitter before they were removed, does the argument that they were private really hold water?
"A privacy claim is quite dubious and indefensible here," said Greg Sterling of Sterling Market Research.
"It would be potentially a different matter if prosecutors were looking for direct messages, which are non-public. Alternatively, if Harris had tweeted under an assumed identity and authorities were seeking to discover his identity, that would be a different situation," he reasoned.
"However, tweeting publicly under a real name does not implicate privacy," Sterling told TechNewsWorld. "Tweets by their nature are public -- and even if deleted, they were intended to be public and were publicly exposed for many to see."

Be Careful What You Tweet

Harris is far from the first person who may be regretting what he tweeted. Earlier this week, actress Alison Pill, who appeared on HBO's The Newsroom, accidentally sent a topless photo of herself to her 14,000 followers. This followed the notorious tweet by Anthony Weiner, a former New York congressman, who a sent a sexually suggestive photo of himself to a Twitter follower two years ago. Weiner resigned from Congress in the midst of a media frenzy.
More recently, Greek track athlete Paraskevi Papachristou was barred from competing in this year's Olympic games after tweeting comments considered racist. These are just three examples that suggest once the proverbial genie is out of the bottle, it isn't so easy to put it back in.
"Twitter is a social medium; 'social' means more than a one-to-one relationship, and it is designed to be broadcast," Webber said. "I would not accept this as a private communications channel. There are technologies that are out there that are more private, but this is meant to be a broadcast channel."