The new findings from Websense point towards increasingly blended security threats which try to pull computers into a network and steal valuable confidential information such as online banking details or credit card numbers. Hackers many have new technologies to take advantage of including smart phones and Windows 7. As well as this more traditional threats such as malicious content spread through advertising and altered search engine results are still ongoing.

It is suspected that spam and attacks via social networking platforms such as Facebook, Myspace or Twitter will become more prominent as hackers take advantage of their massive popularity. Many people place a lot of trust in these platforms and their fellow users making it the ideal way for attackers to spread their content. Another way in which attackers are spreading their content is by using search engines to get users onto their sites. If a site comes up when the latest ?buzz word? is searched for in Google or Bing it is likely to have a high traffic and therefore is the perfect platform for attackers to target.

The committee has criticised the lack of precise detail included in the bill in its report:

?Because of the lack of detail on the face of the Bill and the limited foundation for justification provided for the breadth of these proposed powers, we acknowledge the concerns about the potential for these powers to be applied in a disproportionate manner which could lead to a breach of internet users? rights to respect for correspondence and freedom of expression.?

The JCHR has called for the government to provide much more justification in its proposals. It especially focuses on technical measures such as what the minimum criteria for imposing disconnection would be and whether people could seek an alternative ISP once they have been disconnected.

It appears the government was given an extension on the deadline and avoided any further action as the European Commission had threatened before the December deadline was missed. At this time the government is refusing to provide any information as to what was contained in the reply

In October last year the European commission started the second stage of their investigation into the UK focusing on a lack of internet privacy and data protection. Interest in this area was started by the controversy surrounding Phorm and the potential misuse of deep packet inspection technology. This together with BT?s secret trials of similar technologies on their customers meant that the issues were bought to the EC?s attention.

The controversy surrounding Phorm first appeared in 2008 after it emerged that BT had been running two trials of the technology without their customer?s knowledge. This began a lengthily battle against Phorm from a number of different groups who believed its methods were an abuse of private data with many people comparing it to spyware.

Phorm had been working with a number of UK ISPs before the controversy including TalkTalk, Virgin Media and BT however all of its major backers in the UK pulled out following the bad press.

The OFT?s official statement reads:

?The OFT’s initial view, following consultation, is that the joint venture threatens significantly to affect competition in mobile?telecommunications in the UK.?

They are now looking into the proposal further to decide whether it should be referred to the Competition Commission for a more detailed investigation.

If the merger goes ahead the group would effectively control 40% of the mobile broadband market and use 84% of the 1800 MHz radio spectrum, a very high proportion to be put in the hands of just one operator. 1800 MHz is currently being used for 2G voice calls however under the new Digital Britain plans it could become available for mobile broadband use.

It is suspected the OFT?s investigation will be used to negotiate concessions with the ?T-Orange? group to provide some Digital Britain friendly policies and help the government towards some of their goals. It could be used as a tool in helping the proposed 2mbps speed become available to everyone by 2012 however even if the merger goes ahead that goal is looking more and more unstable especially considering the prospect of a new government taking over the plans after the next general election.

It?s not just the industry itself that are on ACS: Law?s back though; several consumer groups, politicians and the ISPA have also spoke out against the tactics used by the firm due to the unreliable data. The threat letters are largely being seen as the company trying to make a quick profit by targeting consumers who are often completely innocent.

Of course, the music industry are also happy to send out threat letters, although hopefully those sent out as a result of the digital economy bill will be based on someone more solid evidence than ACS: Law, although considering the bill also wants to use IP addresses as complete evidence of the guilt of one person, we?re not certain.

The BPI said in a statement:

?We don’t favour the approach taken by ACS:Law to tackling illegal filesharing, which is at odds with the proportionate and graduated response advocated by BPI and proposed in the Digital Economy Bill.

We uphold the highest standards of evidence, and our view is that legal action is best reserved for the most persistent or serious offenders – rather than widely used as a first response.”

The BPI have also joined musician Bono this week in telling the world that internet providers have more than enough cash floating around to pay for the costs of policing file sharing on their networks. Anyone familiar with the broadband industry will know that this simply isn?t true and that most providers operating on increasingly small profit margins in an incredibly competitive market.

Because the service uses light, multiple sensors could be set up and each room and bounced off walls. Not only does this make wireless broadband much faster, it could also vastly increase the security of wireless networks by reducing the range to a much smaller area (i.e, one house).

The system could also be used in areas were heavy radio usage interfere with a traditional Wi-Fi single. Overall, the technology is clearly a step up from Wi-Fi, but the cost of the technology could well turn many people off.

There?s no commercial product planned yet, but we can imagine that when it does get released it?s going to quite a bit more expensive than regular Wi-Fi. Still, Wi-Fi is a popular technology that has had very few technical advances in the last few years and any new breakthroughs in the technology can only be a good thing, especially while the government are so determined to use our IP address as evidence in file sharing cases.

What do you think? Would you welcome fast Wi-Fi or are your current speeds good enough? Would you be willing to pay more than the average price of a router to enjoy increased range (and therefore, increased security)?

The conservatives have stated their intention that 100 Mbps will be available to most homes by 2017. It?s a similar pledge to Labour which aims to bring next generation services to 90% of homes within a similar time frame, but it?s inclusion of a solid goal on the actual speed makes it all the more exciting. Even more, the conservatives plan to fund the investment using the BBC licence free rather than the 50p broadband tax.

Shadow Chancellor, George Osborne talked about their broadband plans on the BBC this week:

?You know, you look at countries like South Korea, Singapore – they are way ahead of us, and they seizing this new technology. So the next Conservative government is going to aim to have a 100 megabit Broadband to a majority of the population by 2017.

In the 19th century we built the railways; in the 20th century we built the motorways. In the 21st century, let’s build the super-fast Broadband network. That will create hundreds of thousands of jobs for Britain.?

Currently 3.5% of the BBC licence is being used to fund the digital televisions switchover. The plan would be to use this case to fund the rollout in rural areas relying on the private sector to develop the broadband structure of towns and cities. The party has also mentioned that reducing the fibre tax could also be a good way to fund investment in next gen broadband, something that?s infinitely more palatable to many consumers than just taxing them.

The latest monthly survey from news site ISPreview has revealed that while around half of the 412 respondents have a genuine interest in the technology, 25% want the speed of the service to be improved. Other stumbling blocks for many consumers include larger usage allowances, better reliability and lower prices.

The problem with mobile broadband is that the speeds of the service are often barely recognisable as broadband and fall much slower (sometimes more than four times slower) than ADSL packages. Consumers buying into mobile broadband generally expect similar speed and service to what they are used to.

Although most operators advertise speeds of up to either 3.6 or 7.2 mbps, the actual real life speeds are often much slower, and the technology actually generates very little revenue for the mobile broadband providers.

Currently, mobile broadband is not a serious alternative to ADSL in the UK. Even if you can get good speeds restrictive bandwidth limits means that much of the Internet is ?off limits?, such as video streaming sites and music downloading. Long Term Evolution technology that will be introduced in 2011 could help alleviate speed and reliability problems in the future.

One of the biggest problems with the faults process right now is the inevitable BT visit if tests over the phone fail to find anything conclusive. This is a common occurrence for a fault like line noise that could have multiple causes and can be difficult to diagnose remotely. The problem is that openreach engineers charge you if they don?t find a problem or if the problem was outside of BT?s area.

BT will cover free repair to faults resulting to anything that they conceive as belonging to them, which is essentially everything from the phone jack in your premises out onto the street and beyond, but? doesn?t over you own internal wiring. The problem is that most consumers don?t really have a clue about what constitutes internal problems. Many line faults are also intermittent ? fail to have a problem when the BT engineer shows up and you could be charged just for the callout.

BT has announced that some of this process, that it calls Special Faults Investigation (SFI) will be changed for SFI2 that allows a more modular approach and is focused on tackling the issues caused by Local Loop Unbundled (LLU) broadband which the majority of UK consumers are subscribed to.

However, while the new service may solve some problems, it comes with another new callout charge that could see consumers getting charged twice ? once for a test on the internal wires and one on the external connections. There?s also no independent way of telling if a fault simply wasn?t fixed or there wasn?t one to begin with, thanks to BTs monopoly on the network.

Adrian Kennard, Direct of AAISP commented on the charges and lack of third party regulation:

“Even what he says misses the point that they do not “prove the fault not to be in openreach’s (or just BT’s) network”.

What they do is *fail* to identify the fault in their network as so *assume* it is in the end user equipment. They do not prove it is there. But that is the basis for them charging.”

A statement from BT stated that new tools could mean charging could be lowered:

?Depending on these engineering work packages carried out, the charges may be lower than today’s standard charge. Additionally the investigation itself will be more ‘intelligent’ with Openreach engineers using the latest test and diagnostic tools available in the industry in a structured procedure to trace a complex fault.?

The CView technology was announced last year, along with news that Virgin Media would be trailing the system on their own network without prior consent from their customers. Detica and Virgin Media both claim that the service is automatic and closed and does not identified individuals, and that it will only be used to monitor the activity of the overall network, not single consumers.

The European Commission isn?t taking concerns from privacy groups and individuals lightly however, and has announced its intent to keep a firm watch on the technology during the trial:

?The Commission confirms its commitment to the protection of privacy and security of electronic communications as one of its priorities, and it keeps a close eye on the further development of technologies in favour of businesses and consumers, in order to ensure they are used in a way that complies with EU rules. The Commission’s services will closely monitor this case.”

The system is designed to monitor the level of piracy on an ISPs network, and could play a crucial role in the government?s plans to track down on piracy. After all, if you can?t monitor piracy levels online, how do you know if your tactics are working?

Of course, the only way that technology like CView can work is through a process called Deep Packet Inspection, a controversial technology that was previously used in 2008 by Phorm in order to better advertise to net consumers. Phorm lost most of its contracts with larger suppliers following a large amount of negative press and campaigning from privacy groups ? especially after it was revealed the system was tested on customers secretly by BT.

In contrast, the CView trials have been announced openly and have even been supported as way of regulating piracy by UK industry regulator, Ofcom. Unsurprisingly the music and film interest are very interested in seeing the technology in action. It?s likely that CView and Detica have some way to go yet if they are looking to convince every day net users, however.