Apple iTunes - Version 7.1.1 Released

Still lovin' my new iPod shuffle.

It's running like a champ.

I spied word on my web-rounds today that Apple has released a minor version increment of iTunes.

Apple iTunes 7.1.1

While I couldn't find any release note details on the Apple site yet, filehippo.com is reporting simply the following information:

- iTunes 7.1.1 addresses a stability issue and minor compatibility problems in iTunes 7.1.

I downloaded and installed it without any issues. All of our shuffles and my 4G iPod brick unit are all working fine with it.

The latest version of iTunes is running on my XP system without any issues.

Go get it...maybe it might help with some of those issues of late.

I'm jamming out, streaming SomaFM's Secret Agent tunes....

Yeah, Baby!

--Claus

Malware Notes...

Lavasoft Ad-aware 2007 (beta 2)

Now out for general consumption via Lavasoft Blog - Lavasoft. Actually, it has been out for a while for registered users.

Their home page Ad-Aware @ Lavasoft reports the following features in Ad-aware:

• a redesigned engine for faster scanning,
• something called "CSI technology" (if it has anything to do with Marg Helgenberger..sign me up now!) to look for imbedded malware and new threats,
• improved detection database...with incremental updating,
• a newly redesigned GUI,
• the ability to scan Alternate Data Streams (ADS) in NTFS volumes,
• and a scheduling service.

Actually, CSI stands for "Code Sequence Identification" so no Marg Helgenberger technology is embedded...too bad.

If you don't want to register for the ongoing version, you may download a version directly from filehippo.com.

Be aware, that it will only run for a few days without registration. To fully "unlock" it, you must register.

I have taken a brief amount of time and registered with Lavasoft as a Beta Tester and found it to be very painless. Give 'em your email address; you will get a login password sent to your provided address.

Log in and you are In-Like-Flint! Answer a very brief and simple survey and you are granted access to the download goodies!

Current version available for Beta testers is Ad-Aware 2007 Beta 3. It is being issued as a .msi file. Curious!

The way I see it, I get to play with the newest version of a trusted anti-malware program that has saved my rear-end quite a few times...seems like the least I can to do give something back and contribute.

I don't know if they will keep a "free" version of the upgraded final release, but I am hopeful they will. It would fit in with their current model of free-for-personal-use policy with Ad-aware Personal SE.

I did note in a brief review that it does seem to need to install a system-level driver or two to run. In Ad-aware Personal SE you could install it onto a pc, then copy the installed program folder onto a USB stick and use it on other (personal) pc's...kinda "portably." However, at this point, I'm not sure you will be able to do this in the new version. That's too bad for power-users and malware fighters who are used to keeping a version on USB ready to run, or installed on a BartPE disk.

I need to do some more work with it when the "final" version is released.

I really wish a classy company like Lavasoft would release a supported portable version of their basic/free products...I know they would likely win over even more fans..although the ranks of Ad-aware fans are already quite large with this trusted anti-malware application.

I haven't used it enough to comment on it's scanning performance just yet...maybe soon.

Worth a look if you want to register.

Malwarebytes Highlights

RogueRemover is a free product offered by Malwarebytes.org.

It is available in a free version as well as a paid ($14.95/lifetime) version, RogueRemover Pro

Unlike most of the other anti-spyware/anti-malware programs out there, RogueRemover focuses on a growing niche of malware -- anti-malware products that are really wolves in sheep's clothing. I'm speaking of applications that claim to help users (often already dealing with a malware infection) and only serve to make the problem worse by installing malware in the guise of removing it.

Take a look at The Spyware Warrior's list of Rogue/Suspect Anti-Spyware Products & Web sites to see what all the fuss is about.

Alex Eckelberry of Sunbelt Software, frequently posts warnings about new rouge anti-spyware products on his very readable SunbeltBLOG.

Yuck!

Per Malwarebyte's product description:

RogueRemover is a utility that can remove various rogue antispyware, antivirus and hard drive cleaning utilities. Rogue applications are applications that rather than remove spyware, provide false positives, distribute malware or spyware, advertise, or provide useless uninstallers. The main point is that rogue applications are useless and eat up system resources.

RogueRemover has the ability to completely remove WinAntiSpyware/WinAntiVirus, SpyAxe, VirusBlast, VirusBursters and many more!

The current database of rogue anti-spyware products removed by RogueRemover numbers over 260 products...and (sadly) keeps growing.

Also can be made portable for the USB toting crowds.

Other useful utilities offered by Malwarebytes:

FileASSASSIN -- a free utility to aid in deletion of locked malware files from the pc. It comes in three versions, English, Spanish, and a "Portable" version able to run from a USB drive.

RegASSASSIN -- a free and portable utility that helps "...remove stubborn registry keys by resetting the key's permissions and then deleting it."

Claus says "Very Nice!"

Check out their Malwarebytes Blog while you are at it. Great writing style and useful information.

Malware Reversing Paper

Via a recent SANS-ISC Handler's Diary post, the Websense team has been hard at work documenting how a nasty malware infection file works.

Websense Security Labs Threat Blog: Norwegian Bank Malware Analysis

It was a tricky nut to crack...and is quite fascinating...if you are into these things.

Stay safe on the Tubes....

--Claus

Scanning Houston Weather Radars

I don't know what the most popular links are on our Houston-area local news sites.

I'm guessing, however, that they have to be the "live" weather radar images.

When the Gulf-Coast storms come rolling through, it doesn't matter if we are at work or at home, Lavie and I often head to our favorite Houston weather radars on-line to see what is coming.

Sometimes it is downright scary!

In the Early Days...Intellicast

A lifetime ago, when we first got on the Net, just about the only radar site worth keeping an eye on (for me at least) was over at Intellicast.

The radar images were big and really detailed. You could even animate them. However, there was often a bit of "lag-time" between the current time and the posted radar image time. That made it challenging to really tell what was going on.

Was that big purple cell coming my way? Or was it the one that had already passed?

Soon, the The Weather Channel's website came into play and also had some nice radar images.

Now with ViperMaxVectorPentangular Radar 7000!

The local news guys figured out real quick that by providing detailed and current radar imagery to the hungering on-line masses, they could provide a public service and (no doubt) drive tons of page-hits from the local populations.

And the radar-races began.

As a non-radar technologist, I really can't sort out the reality from the hype...but I knows me on-line radars and why I keep going back to some more than others.

Here are my Houston weather radar links (in order of preference) and why I like-em.

These are not all-inclusive! There may be others as well, but these are the ones I frequent the most.

Note: These are only my opinions on Houston on-line radar images...are are no-way a reflection on my opinions for the on-air weather news casts or radar imagery.

And by "Regional/Closeup" views...I mean Houston and the surrounding counties...

First Place: abc13.com's Mega Doppler Radar

• Time lag between image and current time: currently 7-10min
• Default image size: Appx. 500x425 px
• Animated looping supported?: Yes
• Regional/Closeup views?: Yes (9)
• Registration required?: No

Why do I like this site? The regional/closeup views are well divided by the counties, offering nine more detailed county coverage views. That also is more than any other competitor. However, they are on a bit of thin-ice. KTRK seems to have recently updated it to show a satellite image underlay. I'm not real impressed by that. The green sat-image is very busy and while cool, makes it hard to pick out the major highways and the smaller cloud/storm cells can be hard to pick out.

Second Place: Click2Houston's Doppler 2000Plus Radar

• Time lag between image and current time: currently 7-10min
• Default image size: Appx. 640x480 px
• Animated looping supported?: Yes
• Regional/Closeup views?: Yes (4)
• Registration required?: No

Two things really stand out with me with Doppler2K+. First, the background image consists of shades of green with clearly defined county lines. This really makes the freeway grids really pop out and it is very easy to pick out storm cells in relation to the freeways. I (generally) really prefer that background instead of the high-tech sat-view images. Secondly, the default image size is the largest offered by any of the contenders. That size level makes it very nice to view at a glance. Unlike the other competitors who have mini-view regional images to make selection easy, Click2 requires use of a smaller "drop-box" above the image. While, it does provide a clearer site page, it is not as convenient to find and use.

Third Place: KHOU's Doppler Radar

• Time lag between image and current time: currently 10-23+ min
• Default image size: Appx. 175x130 px
• Animated looping supported?: Yes (after registered user login)
• Regional/Closeup views?: Yes (7) (after registered user login)
• Registration required?: (yes for detailed radar views)

I really want to rate this radar site higher...but there are two thing that force me to knock it down. First, registration is required to view any more detailed views. That's too bad. I know that registration is sometimes a necessary evil but all of the other sites don't require it to get nice radar imagery. Second is the lag time between radar image and "real" time on the non-registered user views. It's often pretty high. So while the radar images may be great...it doesn't help much if the really red/yellow/purple storm cell image is too old to be of any use. Those major drawbacks aside, once you DO register and log in, the images and options are pretty spectacular. Positive points abound: First registered users can click on a "desktop" link which will open a small 320x240px (appx.) no-ad popup window that can be left open with your other desktop windows...really nice for monitoring the frequent Gulf-coast downpours between spreadsheets and network data. Second, users can click the "large" link and get a ad-heavy popup window sized at 640x780px (appx.) that gives a very clear view without all the sat-image fussiness. Third, going deeper onto the Doppler Radar link, a very well designed Harris County radar image appears. It is sized at a generous 560x470px (appx.), allows for selected view of rainfall totals, tracking, hail, warning boxes; and you can add/remove overlays of topography, roads, labels, boundaries, cites and county names. Really nice. It can be looped, or paused and this particular radar image is about 7min or so behind current time. And, fourth, it has nice, very clear color choices for the radar images and backgrounds so it is highly "readable" in tracking storm cells.

Drop the registration requirement and this would likely be #1.

Fourth Place: myfoxhouston's FOXRAD radar

• Time lag between image and current time: currently 7-10 min
• Default image size: Appx. 400x300 px
• Animated looping supported?: Yes
• Regional/Closeup views?: Yes (4)
• Registration required?: No

The images on this site also get lost under the bright-green sat-image picture. Also, the scale is pretty wide and it is much more difficult to see detailed imagery of specific storm cells in relation to your physical location. A strong positive point goes to FOXRAD for the larger images provided. Find the little magnifying glass icon and click on it. A pop-up window is generated and weighs in at a very large 640x480px (appx.) size. Really nice. Still it's hard to see good freeway level detail and forget about street-level detail.

Honorable Mention: Chron.com's Weather NexRad radar

• Time lag between image and current time: currently 1 min
• Default image size: Appx. 355x360 px
• Animated looping supported?: Yes
• Regional/Closeup views?: No
• Registration required?: No

Why? Well, because even though it does not give any "closeup" metro or surrounding county views, it displays an image matched almost exactly to my system clocks. That means it appears to be providing static images that are almost "live". Not bad, even if the Harris county is the size of my thumb in the default view. Click the "Enlarge Image" link and a nicely sparse 460x470px (appx.) popup window appears. A little better detail. All in all, nice when you need a wide view radar image of what is happening at this exact minute.

The Future of Local Radar Images?

Weather.com has a neat new feature that may be where radar needs to go next...especially for the local boys.

It's their stunning "Interactive Weather Map (beta)"

Powered-up by Microsoft Virtual Earth, it overlays radar data with (in many areas) street level mapping. Wowzer!

The default image is sized 600x400px (appx.) and is nicely colored. Nothing too bright. It works well. Image data is about 5-10 minutes behind "real" time.

Using the intuitive interface, you can select overlays of Radar, Clouds, Clouds & Radar, or None.

Not only that, but by use of a simple slider-bar, you can adjust the weather imagery transparency levels.

Why?

Well, this is where things get wicked cool. Zoom!

As I noted, it is powered by Microsoft's Visual Earth mapping engine. So just click on the map where you want to view and zoom on down.

Zoom levels depend on the area you are viewing, but I was able to zoom down close enough on downtown Houston to be able to clearly read the Toyota Center logo and name on the building. That's pretty darn close.

And the storm/radar data gets zoomed and overlayed as well.

Hot Tamales!

So although it isn't real-time useful to see what torrent is coming down on you right that instant, it is pretty cool to watch.

So if Microsoft is doing this...I only wonder how long it will be before Google and their powerhouse of satellite mapping goodness follows suit.

Weather.com does offer an "enhanced" version of this as well with no ads, faster local radar maps, and customizable views, all for the low, low price of $24.99/yr.

Bonus: Houston Road-Cams and Traffic Map

And have you seen the cool Houston TranStar road-cam page?

Give me that and their Houston Real-Time Traffic Map and I am all set for a day in the field on the highways and byways of Gulf-Coast Houston regional travel.

Isn't modern technology cool?

If you have any other favorite Houston-area on-line weather radar image sites, please drop a tip in the comments...I'm always looking for more.

Happy skies!

--Claus

Firefox 2.0.0.3 (beta release) Available

We Firefox faithful have been waiting for the next release of 2.0.0.3 for a bit of time.

Yes, I am running nightly "Minefield" (a.k.a. Firefox 3.0) builds and (generally) loving 'em.

Yes, I am running the GranParadiso "Firefox 3.0 Alpha 2" build...but I use "Minefield" more and it is a bit more developed than Fx-GP.

But for my daily web-browsing at work and home, I still use the current release version of Firefox (2.0.0.2).

I just trust it a tad-bit more, especially as I must rely upon it for secure transactions and session browsing.

So Firefox 2.0.0.3 is due for a final release any time now to patch some omissions in the code.

Getting Firefox 2.0.0.3 Beta

This morning I spotted a news article blurb on my Yahoo page, (yeah, I know) that mentioned a new Firefox bug testing plan.

It struck my curiosity...so I clicked on and read the PC World article. Buried in the end was a tip to see how to find out if your Firefox build is set to participate in their beta-testing program.

Over on the Mozilla Development Center beta page, the Mozilla team explained that they would begin releasing 2.0.0.3 beta candidates in the next 24 hours (from March 15)--interesting...but not what I was looking for.

Then I spotted a tiny link at the bottom of the post: 2.0.0.3/1.5.0.11 candidates available.

So I chased that rabbit.

And low-and-behold...I caught it!

There it was; a link to download Firefox 2.0.0.3 (beta) direct from Mozilla's FTP page: 2.0.0.3

You will need to sort through the chaff to find the specific one you want.

(US) English users will probably want to look for the following file name: firefox-2.0.0.3.en-US.win32.installer.exe

(Note: I purposely didn't direct link to the download. Use the 2.0.0.3 main FTP page link, please.)

I downloaded it and used it to update my primary Firefox 2.0.0.2 build up to 2.0.0.3. So far so good.

Caveat:

This (as always) is a beta release. Should you choose to use it and something breaks...don't blame us...do us all a favor and report it to Mozilla and help us out.

Thanks!

Off to buy a new futon-bed for Alvis....Wish me patience and luck.

--Claus

Windows Defender now Version 7? Not? Confunded!

Yes...Windows Defender has been updated...but...well...read-on.

It was stunning news today: BetaNews | Windows Defender Jumps to Version 7 (title on page now changed)

A few bloggers picked up the story as it claimed the changes included a redesigned interface and a new malware detection engine.

While Microsoft has been known to make some big jumps, going from version 1 to version 7 seemed heady stuff, even for them.

I bopped over to the Microsoft Windows Defender download page and checked out the goods.

Sure enough, right there the program was clearly listed as being version 7.0 published on 03/13/2007. (Still showing this information as of this post time.)

On that same page, it says in the Overview note that if you have version 1.1.1592.0 you must manually uninstall Windows Defender (via Add/Remove Programs) before installing the newer version.

(Good Thing™ to know, by the way.)

I did (do the manual uninstall).

And when I got done with the upgrade reinstallation...it reported as version 1.1.1593.

What? Where was the version 7 branding I had been promised?

The file size was a tad-bit smaller than my previous Windows Defender msi file. Hmm.

So at the end of the day...I was left feeling skeptical, as were quite a few of the users who left notes in the comments...observing the same thing.

I ended up concluding that it must have been a typo on Microsoft's download site.

Later the BetaNews link page reported the following update on their story page:

UPDATED Microsoft on Thursday released an upgrade to its Windows Defender application, initially raising the version number from 1.1 to 7.0. The company later explained the version jump was a mistake. The release bring user interface improvements and new malware detection engine.

So that explains it...although the Microsoft download page (at this moment) still show it as version 7.

Oops.

Curiously, that very-same page also has the following paradoxical statement:

This is the most current release of Windows Defender. If Windows Defender informed you that an update is available, you are running an older version. We encourage you to upgrade to this version.

So, if you tried to run an Update check in Windows Defender, and if it told you that an update was available...you are running an older version? Upgrade to this one? What?!!!

I'm so confused!

In the end, there really isn't all too much to see here after all; besides Microsoft's Windows Defender versioning/updates team seemingly being hit by a confundus charm.

Still, if you do use Windows Defender...go get the update, uninstall the old version, and install the new...just don't expect anything dramatic in the (very slightly...in an incremental...very minor sort-of-way) upgraded version.

(Maybe I need to call for the Confuse-A-Cat, Ltd. team to break my confusion! Thanks Gillian for this classic Monty Python flashback!)

--Claus

Firefox Nibblets

Here are a few Firefox "nibblets" I've come across this week:

#1

Firekeeper (extension) - According to the developer it is "...an Intrusion Detection and Prevention System for Firefox. It is able to detect, block and warn the user about malicious sites. Firekeeper uses flexible rules similar to Snort ones to describe browser based attack attempts. Rules can also be used to effectively filter different kinds of unwanted content."

While still in early "alpha" development, I really like the promise of this one. Unlike traditional browser-based malware protection, this gem loads into Firefox and scans your Firefox-based browsing traffic for suspicious content and behaviors. It will use blacklists, whitelists, and default rule settings.

Since it is based on the security-community's little favorite intrusion detection system piggie--Snort--it should have a very robust foundation. And the developer promises to keep the rules very simple. (Firekeeper screenshots)

I'll be keeping my eye on this one...and trying to hook it up with my Firefox 3.0 build over the weekend.

#2

Secure Login (extension) - Billed as a login manager similar to Opera's Wand tool. (screenshots)

It uses Firefox's built in password tool, but disallows the pre-filling of forms. Instead when you land on a login page, you can hover over the tool icon which will then display the actual login URL and the login accounts you have established with it. Select the one you want and it will fill in.

It works to enhance security by controlling Firefox's sometimes bad behavior of pre-filling in JavaScripted login forms with incorrect data. Also, it will check to see if the 2nd level domain of the login URL matches the 2nd level domain of the current page. If not you will be warned before being allowed to continue. You can also control optional settings for all JavaScript code during logins to prevent cross-site scripting attacks.

Overall it is a very clever and secure solution for web-based login-form management.

I'm just now trying to get used to it, so it takes some time to learn and configure...but I think I will grow to like it.

#3

Make Link (extension) - Sweet little Firefox extension allows you to grab a web-link and paste it, properly formatted, into comments or a forum. It can save time and increase accuracy to make sure you don't flub a link-to!

I already use a similar extension, CoLT (Copy Link Text). But it's weakness is that it only copies URL's. If you want to copy/select/format non-linked text on a page and associate it with the page...you are out of luck.

I had been using Copy URL+ to accomplish that task, but it hadn't been playing as well with Firefox 2.0 so I dropped it.

However, Make Link does support the user copying a non-linked selection, but still associating it with the URL of the page. Nice!

--spotted on Lifehacker

#4

Keep Firefox’s location bar on sight : Mozilla Links (Tip)

Some popup/under windows in Firefox will not display the address in the window bar. In some cases this is because they really have something to hide.

By making an easy change in the Firefox about:config settings you can enable URL addresses to always be displayed in popup windows.

To do this:

• Enter about:config in the location bar
• Look for dom.disable_window_open_feature.location
• Double click it to toggle it to true

Nice tip, guys!

Feed your Fox daily!

--Claus

Online Bill-Pay: Almost burned

Lavie has been on me for a very long time, working hard to convince me of the value of paying our bills on line.

I was a hard-cookie to crack.

Until I got burned a few times by the mail service. See I usually mail my bills out at least a week in advance....more if it falls during a holiday when mail may be slow or delayed.

The last straw was when I mailed a gasoline company bill in, ten days in advance, and it ended up getting credited to my account two days past due (12 days from when I mailed it). I watch our credit standing pretty closely, and even a single late payment once a year gives me a bit of grief.

I needed more control over confirming the bill processing was occurring timely so I gave in...and Lavie's wisdom is now appreciated. I now pay close to 95% of our bills on-line. And it usually goes very smoothly. I still pay a few days in advance of the payment due dates, but I really like getting those transaction confirmation numbers! Sweet!

No more late payments.

Except tonight (almost).

It's that crazy gas card account again.

Unlike ALL my other bills, I cannot pay this one MAJOR gas company's gas-card bill directly to them. All my other payments are made direct to the issuer, but this ONE company requires that I use a third-party payer to make my transactions...and it MUST be scheduled several days in advance. No same-day payments here.

So today, six days early, I go online to schedule my gas-card bill payment.

Only when I log in, it says my account cannot be used to make a payment until I re-confirm my ebill with them. OK. Been using for a year with no issues. Must be a new thing.

So I go to the list of companies listed to indicate the account for my ebill...except there is a hitch this time...see, the gas company's name is not in the list; anywhere!

So I check my paper bill and it clearly shows the web address (which I was using) is where I need to log in. I did. But again, looking through the list of companies signed with them, the gas-company is now nowhere on the list, even though my paper bill says this is where I need to still go to pay online.

What gives?

So tomorrow I will write a paper check and mail in my bill, hopefully six-days snail-mail time will be sufficient.

I know that the gas-company's credit cards are actually managed by another party...even though they carry that name. And this particular company's credit issuer was sold to another bank/credit issuer...so I am hopeful that this is just a glitch during the transition process.

I really hope the new credit-issuer will allow me to pay them directly, instead of this third-party stuff.

Still, if I hadn't been in the habit of scheduling the online payments early...I would have had to mail it in and certainly would have been late.

I just hope this one makes it in, in time.

Almost burned again...

--Claus