Private Spacecraft Lifts Off With Space Station Supplies

Orbital Sciences' Cygnus spacecraft has successfully launched from NASA's Wallops Flight Facility in Virginia on its way to becoming the second private vehicle to resupply the International Space Station.

Space.com says:

"The unmanned Cygnus spacecraft and its Antares rocket soared into orbit with a tremendous roar at 10:58 a.m. EDT (1458 GMT) today from [Wallops] — a huge success for the commercial spaceflight company Orbital Sciences Corp., which built both vehicles. The spacecraft is now chasing the space station and is due to arrive early Sunday (Sept. 22), when it will be captured by astronauts using the outpost's robotic arm."

Cygnus bears "1,300 pounds of food, clothing and goodies for the astronauts," The Associated Press says.

Orbital Sciences and billionaire Elon Musk's SpaceX Corp. have been contracted to supply the orbiting outpost since the space shuttle was retired two years ago. Two SpaceX Dragon robotic capsules have already been up on resupply missions, the most recent one in March.

View the original article here

New Private Spacecraft Set For Mission To Resupply Space Station

An artist's rendering of the Cygnus spacecraft approaching the International Space Station.

Orbital Sciences An artist's rendering of the Cygnus spacecraft approaching the International Space Station.

Orbital Sciences

The SpaceX Dragon may have gotten there first, but Orbital Sciences' Cygnus spacecraft is set to become the second private robotic ship to dock with the International Space Station after a Wednesday launch from NASA's Wallops Flight Facility in Virginia.

The launch is scheduled for 10:50 a.m. EDT on Wednesday from Pad 0A at the Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport at Wallops.

Space.com writes:

"Orbital Sciences' vehicle will fly into space atop the company's Antares rocket, which is ... about the size of a 13-story building, standing 131.5 feet (40 meters) tall. The two AJ26 engines used in the rocket's first stage are based on the NK-33 engine, which was originally developed to launch Russia's giant N-1 moon rocket — the Soviet answer to America's famous Saturn V — in the 1960s. However, the Soviet heavy-lifter was never launched successfully."

Orbital Sciences is contracted for eight cargo missions to the ISS under a $1.9 billion contract with NASA.

In May 2012, SpaceX, founded by billionaire Elon Musk, launched the Dragon on its first successful resupply mission to the ISS and in March of this year, a second robotic Dragon delivered 1,200 pounds of supplies to astronauts.

View the original article here

Using private clouds for all the right reasons

Computerworld - Private clouds are all the buzz these days, so you'd be forgiven for thinking that everybody's doing it. But in fact, fewer companies than you might think have deployed 'true' private clouds.

Forrester found in a recent survey of 2,330 people that 26% of IT executives say they have a private cloud. But among those who claimed they have a private cloud, only 13% implemented the technologies that Forrester says truly define a private cloud, like self-service and automated provisioning, among other features. Instead, they built private environments that have some but not all the features of a private cloud.

Further, some businesses that are building private clouds would really be better off with a standard virtualized data center or with a public cloud, experts say. Around half the time, businesses build private clouds for the wrong reasons and should be doing something else instead, estimates David Linthicum, a consultant at Cloud Technology Partners.

Computerworld - Private clouds are all the buzz these days, so you'd be forgiven for thinking that everybody's doing it. But in fact, fewer companies than you might think have deployed 'true' private clouds.

Forrester found in a recent survey of 2,330 people that 26% of IT executives say they have a private cloud. But among those who claimed they have a private cloud, only 13% implemented the technologies that Forrester says truly define a private cloud, like self-service and automated provisioning, among other features. Instead, they built private environments that have some but not all the features of a private cloud.

Further, some businesses that are building private clouds would really be better off with a standard virtualized data center or with a public cloud, experts say. Around half the time, businesses build private clouds for the wrong reasons and should be doing something else instead, estimates David Linthicum, a consultant at Cloud Technology Partners.

"In many instances I'll determine quickly that it's an emotional decision versus a logical one," he says. For example, some IT departments are so used to running their own data centers that they have a hard time letting go of it. Sometimes that's because they may be concerned about how the shift might affect their jobs.

That doesn't mean there isn't a need for private clouds. There is, in the right circumstances, which include new, large development operations, apps that draw on truly sensitive data and aging data centers.

The first question businesses should ask themselves is why they want to build a private cloud. Typically, enterprises talk about security, Linthicum says. But that's not the whole story, he says. "The reality is, it's control. They want the thing to exist in their data center. It's just hard to change habits," he says.

Mike Schutz, general manager of product marketing for Windows Server and Management at Microsoft, agrees that control is an issue. "In some cases what the public cloud doesn't provide today is a level of control that some organizations need," he says.

It's not just the ability to reach out and touch the servers. With a private cloud, a business can build just the amount of memory and storage it wants and make its own software choices too, around databases, for instance. Organizations can also customize security to fit their needs and use the networking gear that ensures fastest connections to their data.

Security can be a good reason to use private cloud in some cases, Linthicum says. If a business is handling state secrets, personally identifiable information or proprietary research, a private cloud can make sense.

View the original article here

Using private clouds for all the right reasons

Computerworld - Private clouds are all the buzz these days, so you'd be forgiven for thinking that everybody's doing it. But in fact, fewer companies than you might think have deployed 'true' private clouds.

Forrester found in a recent survey of 2,330 people that 26% of IT executives say they have a private cloud. But among those who claimed they have a private cloud, only 13% implemented the technologies that Forrester says truly define a private cloud, like self-service and automated provisioning, among other features. Instead, they built private environments that have some but not all the features of a private cloud.

Further, some businesses that are building private clouds would really be better off with a standard virtualized data center or with a public cloud, experts say. Around half the time, businesses build private clouds for the wrong reasons and should be doing something else instead, estimates David Linthicum, a consultant at Cloud Technology Partners.

Computerworld - Private clouds are all the buzz these days, so you'd be forgiven for thinking that everybody's doing it. But in fact, fewer companies than you might think have deployed 'true' private clouds.

Forrester found in a recent survey of 2,330 people that 26% of IT executives say they have a private cloud. But among those who claimed they have a private cloud, only 13% implemented the technologies that Forrester says truly define a private cloud, like self-service and automated provisioning, among other features. Instead, they built private environments that have some but not all the features of a private cloud.

Further, some businesses that are building private clouds would really be better off with a standard virtualized data center or with a public cloud, experts say. Around half the time, businesses build private clouds for the wrong reasons and should be doing something else instead, estimates David Linthicum, a consultant at Cloud Technology Partners.

"In many instances I'll determine quickly that it's an emotional decision versus a logical one," he says. For example, some IT departments are so used to running their own data centers that they have a hard time letting go of it. Sometimes that's because they may be concerned about how the shift might affect their jobs.

That doesn't mean there isn't a need for private clouds. There is, in the right circumstances, which include new, large development operations, apps that draw on truly sensitive data and aging data centers.

The first question businesses should ask themselves is why they want to build a private cloud. Typically, enterprises talk about security, Linthicum says. But that's not the whole story, he says. "The reality is, it's control. They want the thing to exist in their data center. It's just hard to change habits," he says.

Mike Schutz, general manager of product marketing for Windows Server and Management at Microsoft, agrees that control is an issue. "In some cases what the public cloud doesn't provide today is a level of control that some organizations need," he says.

It's not just the ability to reach out and touch the servers. With a private cloud, a business can build just the amount of memory and storage it wants and make its own software choices too, around databases, for instance. Organizations can also customize security to fit their needs and use the networking gear that ensures fastest connections to their data.

Security can be a good reason to use private cloud in some cases, Linthicum says. If a business is handling state secrets, personally identifiable information or proprietary research, a private cloud can make sense.

View the original article here

Indian bureaucrats may be asked not to use private email services for official work

The Indian government is expected to require that Indian bureaucrats use email service provided by the National Informatics Center for their official work, as it tries to secure its communications infrastructure.

The requirement will be part of a proposed new email policy, said sources in government who declined to be named.

India's Minister for Communications and IT, Kapil Sibal, told Parliament about a week ago that the government had decided that all its embassies would use mail servers from the government's National Informatics Centre, which will be installed in the embassies and directly linked to a server in India.

The minister was responding to concerns from the opposition about reports of large scale surveillance of telephone calls and emails by the National Security Agency in the U.S. Former NSA contractor Edward Snowden disclosed through newspapers certain documents that suggested that the NSA had real-time access to content on the servers of Internet companies. The companies have denied their participation in the program.

The Indian government appears to have been very lax on security, despite having an email service from the NIC, with some ministers listing their Gmail addresses on their websites. It is not known whether they use these addresses for official communications as well.

Google did not comment on the move by the government to require bureaucrats not to use private services for official email communications. "We don't comment on speculation," a Google spokeswoman said.

According to Indian parliamentary records, Sibal last month told Parliament: "We are stating in that [email] policy that it is mandatory for the Government of India officials stationed at Embassies or working in Missions abroad, deputationists to only use static IP Addresses, Virtual Private Networks (VPNs), One-time Password for accessing Government of India e-mail services." He assured the members of the upper house, called the Rajya Sabha, that the email will be encrypted so that nobody else will be able to access it besides the Indian government.

Some officials are recommending that the email servers for the government employees be managed by the individual government departments on their own rather than giving all the responsibility to NIC, the sources said.

John Ribeiro covers outsourcing and general technology breaking news from India for The IDG News Service. Follow John on Twitter at @Johnribeiro. John's e-mail address is john_ribeiro@idg.com

John Ribeiro covers outsourcing and general technology breaking news from India for The IDG News Service.
More by John Ribeiro, IDG News Service

View the original article here

How Amazon (and you) might use its private Wi-Fi network

A report that Amazon has tested a wireless network actually sheds new light on plans by satellite communications company Globalstar to extend the Wi-Fi spectrum.

The extension, if approved by the FCC, would create a new, uncluttered, high-performance Wi-Fi channel in upper reaches of the 2.4-GHz band, a channel Globalstar apparently intends as the basis of a managed service with cellular-like quality and roaming.

Amazon's wireless testing was revealed last week in a Bloomberg news story, "Amazon Is Said to Have Tested a Wireless Network," by Olga Kharif and Danielle Kucera. The tests were run near Amazon's Lab126 research facilities in Cupertino, California, according to Bloomberg's sources. The lab designs Amazon's Kindle devices.

"The trial underlines how Amazon, the world's largest e-commerce company, is moving beyond being a Web destination and hardware maker and digging deeper into the underlying technology for how people connect to the Internet," according to the Bloomberg story. "That would let Amazon create a more comprehensive user experience, encompassing how consumers get online, what device they use to connect to the Web and what they do on the Internet."

But the tests suggest that Amazon doesn't intend or even want to be a traditional wireless network provider. Instead, the online retail giant seems to be exploring the potential of a branded, managed Wi-Fi service that mirrors the features of cellular service: seamless roaming, minimal interference, improved security, and consistent high performance.

The Bloomberg report notes that the test network used spectrum controlled by satellite communications company Globalstar, based in Milpitas, California. In November 2012, the company petitioned the FCC to allow it to use part of its satellite spectrum to offer terrestrial data services, an offering it dubbed Terrestrial Low Power Service.

TLPS adds a big chunk of new capacity: 22 MHz to the currently available 72 MHz of 2.4 GHz spectrum, according to Jarvinian Wireless Innovation Fund, a Cambridge, Mass., research and investment firm focused on spectrum issues. Jarvinian claims credit for the TLPS idea and the engineering work behind it, and has been working closely with Globalstar.TLPS would essentially add a fourth non-overlapping channel, dubbed Channel 14, to the upper reaches of the 2.4 GHz band used for unlicensed Wi-Fi transmissions. The channel actually would combine Globalstar's adjacent licensed spectrum with a small amount of unlicensed spectrum.

But because this fourth channel is actually licensed to Globalstar, the company plans to use it in something like a wholesale, managed wireless service that would offer greater range and performance than conventional public Wi-Fi hotspots, and be available to end users through carriers or through brands, such as Amazon, operating as virtual network operators.

The Bloomberg story does take note of these plans. "Globalstar is seeking regulatory approval to convert about 80 percent of its spectrum to terrestrial use....Globalstar met with FCC Chairwoman Mignon Clyburn in June, and a decision on whether the company can convert the spectrum could come within months."

If given a green light, "Globalstar is considering leasing its spectrum, sharing service revenues with partners, and other business models, one of the people said. With wireless spectrum scarce, Globalstar's converted spectrum could be of interest to carriers and cable companies, seeking to offload ballooning mobile traffic, as well as to technology companies."

Earlier this year, then-FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski repeated his pledge to continue expanding spectrum in both licensed and unlicensed bands.

In June, Wi-Fi vendor Ruckus Wireless, in Mountain View, California, announced it had completed a round of tests with Globalstar. The trial combined unlicensed spectrum from the upper edge of the 2.4 GHz Industrial Scientific Medical (ISM) band and Globalstar's licensed Mobile Satellite Services (MSS) spectrum. Ruckus used its Smart Wi-Fi brand access points and controllers, targeted at carrier-based Wi-Fi services, and a selection of existing smartphones with built-in Wi-Fi radios that had been given and over-the-air firmware update to run on the new channel.

According to Ruckus, the test showed that the new spectrum could achieve up to five times the range and four times the capacity "over traditional Wi-Fi." Unfortunately, the Ruckus statement was not more specific about the meaning of "traditional Wi-Fi," which could refer to 802.11n or even 802.11g, or about "capacity." Capacity refers to the network's ability to handle larger numbers of users and greater amounts of traffic. [One discussion of Wi-Fi capacity is found in "Aerohive Design & Configuration Guide: High-density Wi-Fi," by Andrew von Nagy, an Aerohive employee.] The increased range is important especially if higher data rates are sustained over those longer distances.

In a June interview posted at EnterpriseNetworkingPlanet.com, Jarvinian Managing Director John Dooley was quoted as saying "Even in an indoor environment made difficult or unusable by spectral congestion, usable connections [in the Ruckus-Globalstar tests] were established at 3-5 times the distance of public WiFi." The tests also showed more uniform high speeds across longer ranges, according to that post.

The Ruckus statement also said the Globalstar test network did not interfere with nearby conventional Wi-Fi networks. That lack of interference is important. In filing its comments on Globalstar's FCC petition, the Consumer Electronics Association argued that "Globalstar's....proposal presents significant risk to unlicensed operations in the 2.4 GHz band and potentially threatens the economic value, consumer benefit, growth, and potential for innovation of those unlicensed operations." Other industry groups have also raised concerns. [See "Globalstar's plan for an extra Wi-Fi band draws fire."] 

But Amazon apparently sees potential in offering its customers, ever more untethered with smartphones and tablets, a premium Wi-Fi experience that's superior to what public Wi-Fi today can offer.

View the original article here

NSA-dodging mail service explains why email can never truly be private and secure

Earlier this month, Lavabit and Silent Circle—two privacy-minded email providers—decided to shut up shop rather than give the U.S. government the chance to access to their customer data. Shortly thereafter, Lavabit owner Ladar Levison told Forbes, "If you knew what I knew about email, you might not use it."

This weekend, Silent Circle's Louis Kowolowski dropped the cryptic comments and explained a major, inherent vulnerability with email: metadata.

While encryption technologies like PGP and SMIME can be used to obscure the actual contents of a message, assuming you use a desktop program that supports encryption software, current email protocols don't allow you to secure the "header" metadata details that are used to shuffle email from point to point. The sender, recipient, subject, date and time, and even server path information is all sent along in clear text.

That's enough to be a liability to people who truly need privacy, according to Kowolowski.

If your goal is to not have metadata leakage in your otherwise secure communications, you may wish to avoid email altogether. Email leaks the information about who is communicating, and how often. This information may be just as damaging as the content of the email.

Snowden's leaks have shown that the U.S. government is aware of the power of metadata. The NSA collects Verizon's phone records to examine metadata and analyze call patterns, and the government does not need individual warrants to do so, as courts have classified metadata as "transactional data" rather than actual communications. Again, here's Kowolowski:

With the tapping of backbone internet providers, interested parties can now see all traffic on the internet. The days where it was possible for two people to have a truly private conversation over email, if they ever existed, are long over.

Since text, video, and messaging communications don't suffer from the same header needs as email, they're able to be secured from end-to-end, with all encryption and decryption handled on the client machines—and indeed, Silent Circle still offers "Silent Phone," "Silent Eyes," and "Silent Text" services that do just that. Check out our guiding to protecting your PC from Prism surveillance for more privacy-minded tips and tricks, or if metadata security means less than the message itself, read PCWorld's guide to securing your email.

Brad Chacos spends the days jamming to Spotify, digging through desktop PCs and covering everything from BYOD tablets to DIY tesla coils.
More by Brad Chacos

View the original article here

Bitcoin can be used for private transactions, German government says

The German Federal Ministry of Finance said on Monday that Bitcoin is not a full-fledged currency but that it is permissible to use it in private transactions.

But if companies want to use Bitcoins for commercial transactions, they need the permission of the Federal Financial Supervisory Authority (BaFin), said Martin Chaudhuri, ministry spokesman.

Bitcoin is a digital currency that can be exchanged electronically. But like other virtual currencies it lacks the backing of a government entity or a central bank.

In Germany, Bitcoin is not seen as a real currency by the Ministry of Finance, said Chaudhuri. Bitcoin rather falls under the classification "Rechnungseinheiten als Finanzinstrument" which is a unit of account, he said.

The government clarified its position on Bitcoin at the request of a member of parliament (MP) a couple of weeks ago, said Chaudhuri.

While Bitcoin can be legally used for private transactions in Germany, the Ministry also has the position that the virtual currency has many disadvantages, according to Chaudhuri, noting above all Bitcoin's instability. But because Bitcoins don't have a great impact on the market due to their limited use, the risks are also limited, he added.

Along similar lines, the European Central Bank (ECB) concluded last October that at present, virtual currency schemes such as Bitcoin do not pose a risk to price stability, provided that money creation continues to stay at a low level.

Though virtual currencies tend to be inherently unstable, at the moment they cannot jeopardize financial stability due to their limited connection with the real economy, their trading low volume and lack of wide user acceptance, the ECB said at the time.

But because they are currently not regulated and are not closely supervised, participation in virtual currencies exposes users to credit, liquidity, operational and legal risks, according to the ECB. These currencies could also represent a challenge for public authorities because of the legal uncertainty, it added. And they can also be used by criminals, fraudsters and money launderers to enable their legal activities, the ECB noted.

While the impact of the risks is relatively small, the ECB will periodically revisit developments in virtual currencies to reassess risks.

A similar risk assessment is underway in the U.S. where last week it was revealed that a prominent U.S. Senate committee has launched a formal inquiry to investigate criminal activity and other risks tied to the use of virtual currencies like Bitcoin.

Loek Essers focuses on online privacy, intellectual property, open-source and online payment issues.
More by Loek Essers, IDG News Service

View the original article here