Target Settles Security Breach

Target is reportedly close to paying out $10m to settle a class-action case that was filed after it was hacked and stripped of tens of millions of peoples’ details.

Target was smacked by hackers in 2013 in a massive cyber-thwack on its stores and servers that put some 70 million people’s personal information in harm’s way.

The hack has had massive repercussions. People are losing faith in industry and its ability to store their personal data, and the Target incident is a very good example of why people are right to worry.

As well as tarnishing Target’s reputation, the attack also led to a $162m gap in its financial spreadsheets.

The firm apologized to its punters when it revealed the hack, and chairman, CEO and president Gregg Steinhafel said he was sorry that they have had to “endure” such a thing

Now, according to reports, Target is willing to fork out another $10m to put things right, offering the money as a proposed settlement in one of several class-action lawsuits the company is facing. If accepted, the settlement could see affected parties awarded some $10,000 for their troubles.

We have asked Target to either confirm or comment on this, and are waiting for a response. For now we have an official statement at Reuters to turn to. There we see Target spokeswoman Molly Snyder confirming that something is happening but not mentioning the 10 and six zeroes.

“We are pleased to see the process moving forward and look forward to its resolution,” she said.

Not available to comment, not that we asked, will be the firm’s CIO at the time of the hack. Thirty-year Target veteran Beth Jacob left her role in the aftermath of the attack, and a replacement was immediately sought.

“To ensure that Target is well positioned following the data breach we suffered last year, we are undertaking an overhaul of our information security and compliance structure and practices at Target,” said Steinhafel then.

“As a first step in this effort, Target will be conducting an external search for an interim CIO who can help guide Target through this transformation.”

“Transformational change” pro Bob DeRodes took on the role in May last year and immediately began saying the right things.

“I look forward to helping shape information technology and data security at Target in the days and months ahead,” he said.

“It is clear to me that Target is an organization that is committed to doing whatever it takes to do right by their guests.”

We would ask Steinhafel for his verdict on DeRodes so far and the $10m settlement, but would you believe it, he’s not at Target anymore either having left in the summer last year with a reported $61m golden parachute.

Source

Twitter Makes A Deal With IBM

Twitter Inc has purchased 900 patents and inked a cross-licensing agreement with IBM, making peace with Big Blue and bulking up on its intellectual property portfolio as it takes on larger rivals Google and Facebook.

The agreement announced on Friday comes after International Business Machines Corp accused Twitter in November – on the eve of its high-profile initial public offering – of infringing three of its patents. At the time, it underscored how few patents the six-year-old social media company possessed in relation to more established rivals.

A cross-licensing agreement will help safeguard Twitter against similar claims in the future.

IBM is one of the industry’s largest research spenders and stockpilers of intellectual property, a consistent leader in U.S. patent filings and the owner of some 41,000 patents.

Twitter is following on the heels of Facebook, which itself faced similar claims before its own 2012 IPO. The world’s largest social network has since gone on a patent-buying spree, acquiring intellectual property from tech bellwethers, including Microsoft Corp and IBM.

“This acquisition of patents from IBM and licensing agreement provide us with greater intellectual property protection and give us freedom of action to innovate on behalf of all those who use our service,” Ben Lee, Twitter’s legal director, said in a joint statement with IBM on Friday.

Source

Will 3D Printing Take Off?

The use of cheaper 3D printing is set to take off when a batch of patents expires in 2014.

Duann Scott, design evangelist at 3D printing company Shapeways said that in February 2014, key patents that currently prevent competition in the market for the most advanced and functional 3D printers will expire. The important patent is one which covers “laser sintering” which is the lowest-cost 3D printing technology. Because of its high resolution in all three dimensions, laser sintering can produce goods that can be sold as finished products.

At the moment it is only possible to buy expensive 3D laser sintering printers, which can cost tens of thousands of dollars each. But once the key patents on 3D printing via laser sintering expire, we could see huge drop in the price of these devices, says Scott.

Key patents expired on a more primitive form of 3D printing, known as fused deposition modelling resulted in an explosion of open-source FDM printers that eventually led to iconic home and hobbyist 3D printer manufacturer Makerbot. When the patents on FDM expired the cost of such printers fell as little as $300. Scott thinks that the same thing will happen with laser deposition 3D printers.

Source

Is Alcatel-Lucent Running Low?

Alcatel-Lucent, which was the combination of Lucent and French network equipment provider Alcatel, has been going through a tough few years as it battles against rivals such as Huawei, Nokia Siemens and Ericsson. Now the firm has reportedly looked to investment bank Goldman Sachs for a loan in return for the firm putting up some of its assets as collateral.

According to Bloomberg’s sources, the amount of the loan has yet to be disclosed and the firm even mooted the prospect of selling assets including its undersea cable and enterprise businesses. The sources said discussions about the sale were still at an early stage and claimed neither asset could fetch more than €1bn, highlighting just how far the firm has fallen in recent years.

Alcatel-Lucent needs to sort out its balance sheet because the firm needs to service more than €2bn debt in the next three years. The company might have to look at its vast patents portfolio, though whether it might sell them or merely license them is not clear at this stage.

With Huawei and ZTE winning business away from European vendors such as Alcatel-Lucent and Nokia Siemens, it is not surprising that the firm is having to take drastic action in order to keep the lights on. However for Alcatel-Lucent it is a embarrassing situation for the firm.

Source…

‘Do Not Track’ Internet Legislation, Advances

California is a moving closer to making  into law the first Do Not Track legislation in the U.S., aimed at protecting Internet users from invasive advertising.

The proposed Senate bill, SB-761, passed a Senate Judiciary Committee vote late Tuesday, but it still has a long road ahead before having a chance of being signed into law. It now moves on to the Appropriations Committee, and must also pass the Senate and State Assembly before being sent to Governor Jerry Brown’s desk.

Still, it’s the first time such a bill has made it out of committee, and that’s a big deal, according to John Simpson, director of Consumer Watchdog’s Privacy Project. “This is the first time that a ‘do not track’ bill has actually had a hearing and been debated and then voted forward in the legislative process,” he said.

The bill would give California consumers a simple way of opting out of data collection systems that keep track of their online activities. “It puts up a no trespassing sign on our device,” Simpson said.

Opponents of the bill, including Google, the Direct Marketing Association, and the wireless industry group CTIA, say it puts an unnecessary burden on online commerce.

Online marketers love this type of data because it helps them fashion highly effective targeted advertising. But many consumers don’t want to hand marketers every detail of what they do on the Web.

Under the proposed law, users would have a way — possibly a through a browser setting — of telling Web sites not to track them. If a company disregarded this and collected data without permission, it could face stiff fines.

Read More…