In a moment of temporary insanity I actually tried to sign up for a mobile phone subscription with Sweden’s largest carrier, Telia. Why was this such a foolish thing to try to do? Well, you see, Telia used to be a state monopoly; I should’ve known that they’d find some way of demonstrating their utter lack of customer service and general business sense.
TDC has won a contract from the municipality of Copenhagen to provide fixed and mobile telephony services. TDC replaces Telia Denmark as provider and the total value of deals between TDC and Copenhagen becomes DKK 70 million per year
It’s six years since the infamous Blaster worm crippled Windows systems worldwide.
The most damaging variant of Blaster (AKA Lovesan) first started spreading on 11 August 2003, reaching its peak on 13 August.
Security researchers reckon the original malware was created by Chinese VXers after they reverse engineered a Microsoft patch for a DCOM Remote Procedure Call (RPC) flaw in Windows. The worm was capable of spreading without user interaction and used scanning routines to spread. The malware caused widespread network congestion and infected hundreds of thousands of computers, which were rendered unstable and prone to crashing as a result.
Organisations that reportedly suffered network slowdowns or worse because of the worm include German car manufacturer BMW and Swedish telco TeliaSonera.
Once established on infected systems Blaster was programmed to flood windowsupdate.com without spurious traffic on 15 August. In the event little damage was caused because Microsoft had time to respond.
Media attention about the worm spawned copycat virus authors, including Minnesota teenager Jeffrey Lee Parson. Parson (AKA t33kid), then 18, was arrested for creating a variant of the worm in late August 2003. He was eventually jailed for 18 months. Another Blaster copycat author Dan Dumitru Ciobanu, then 24, was arrested by Romanian police for creating a relatively tame variant of the malware.
The worm would never have taken hold if basic Windows firewall was enabled by default. This change only came with Windows XP Service Pack 2 in August 2004.
That change, and the realisation that patching Windows systems were just as important as using up to date anti-virus software, are arguable the long term legacies of the worm.
Blaster was the penultimate entry in a line of highly damaging Windows-specific worms – Code Red and Nimda in 2001 and Slammer in January 2003. Sasser, which followed in May 2004, brought the dynasty to a close.
Since then the malware landscape has changed, with botnet agents, scareware and targeted Trojan attacks becoming far more of a problem. Worms still crop up from time to time but the era of high-profile, noisy megaworms like Blaster belongs to days long gone.
Something strange has happened between France Telecom and Telia Sonera, the first one presented an attempt of buy to the Finnish company.
Formally he has decided to present the papers pertienente to formalize your buy intention, therefore there is no buy, there is not even intention, the curious thing is that according to the declarations of France Telecom “TeliaSonera is not essential for your strategy”, errr …: and to what does the buy intention owe?
This is what in the “real life ™” is translated in that TeliaSonera wanted more money and France Telecom did not want to give any more than 30,000 million euros that it was offering in the beginning, this way of simple.
ID Investigation Discovery has made its debut on Lattelecom Interactive TV, the IPTV service operated by the Latvian TeliaSonera-backed incumbent telco Lattelecom.
Latvia is one of the first countries in the CEE region to offer the latest channel from the Discovery stable. Lattelecom is currently in the process of rolling out DTT in Latvia.
Subscriber figures for Lattelecom Interactive TV, one of the most technologically advanced IPTV services in the region, are not known.
Four film companies have filed a motion in a Swedish court to force TeliaSonera to release details about the operators of the Swetorrents file sharing website.
But so far, TeliaSonera has vowed to protect the privacy of its customer, with the internet service provider (ISP) saying it had no plans to release any information about the site’s operators.
In a suit filed last week in Södertörn District Court south of Stockholm, the four film companies, Svensk Filmindustri (SF), Pan Vision, Filmlance International and Yellow Bird, are seeking to utilize a new Swedish law to make it easier for copyright holders to get information about the operators of websites suspected of facilitating illegal file sharing.
The law, passed on April 1st, gives copyright holders the right to seek a court order compelling ISPs to release information that allows rights holders to identify parties behind IP-addresses which can be traced to suspected acts of copyright violation.
According to Sweden’s Anti-Piracy Agency (Antipiratbyrån), which represents the four companies in the suit, Swetorrents has shown little or no respect for the film companies’ intellectual property.
“Swetorrents makes copyright protected films available which they don’t have the right to disseminate on the internet. In some cases, the films haven’t even been released yet,” said Anti-Piracy Agency chair Björn Gregfelt to the TT news agency.
“We’re talking about a rather comprehensive operation. It’s become a drain on the film companies’ revenues.”
Swetorrents is a client of TeliaSonera, which doesn’t want to release any information about its customer.
“If there is an order from the court, it’s highly probable that we will appeal the decision. We’re not just going to hand over the information. It’s our duty to protect our customers’ privacy,” TeliaSonera spokesperson Patrik Hiselius told TT.
“They should be able to continue communicating, in the same way that it’s possible to communicate by sending a letter without having someone read it.”
It remains unclear, however, exactly how the film companies would proceed if information about the operators of the file sharing site were made public.
“It could be that the film companies request that they halt operations, and they may even seek damages,” said Gregfelt.
The case represents the second attempt by a copyright holders’ organization to utilize the new anti-file sharing law, commonly referred to as the IPRED law.
In June, the district court in Solna, north of Stockholm, ordered broadband provider Ephone to hand over information to five book publishers about a server from which audio books were made available for download on the internet.
Ephone has since appealed the ruling.