bulldog you involved in this? BUYINS.NET: EXBX, IPMG Have Been Added To Naked Short List Today
via COMTEX

January 30, 2007

Jan 30, 2007 (M2 PRESSWIRE via COMTEX News Network) --

BUYINS.NET, www.buyins.net, announced today that these select companies have been added to the NASDAQ, AMEX and NYSE naked short threshold list: Gigabeam Corporation (NASDAQ: GGBM), Ibis Technology Corporation (NASDAQ: IBIS), Cubic Energy Inc (OTCBB: QBIK), Walker Financial Corporation (OTCBB: WLKF), Exobox Technologies Corp. (OTC: EXBX), International Precious Metals Group (OTC: IPMG). For a complete list of companies on the naked short list please visit our web site. To find the SqueezeTrigger Price before a short squeeze starts in any stock, go to www.buyins.net.

Gigabeam Corporation (NASDAQ: GGBM) engages in designing, developing, marketing, selling, leasing, renting, and installing advanced point-to-point wireless communication solutions for commercial and government customers in the United States. It offers GigaBeam wireless communications solution, a point-to-point, line of sight, wireless high-speed communications link, which is established between two GigaBeam transceiver units and are linked wirelessly through the alignment of their antennas and their transmission of data via radio signals in the 71-76 GHz and 81-86 GHz spectrum bands. The company serves telecom operators, carriers and network operators, communications and IT service providers, government and military entities, and other enterprises. GigaBeam Corporation has strategic alliances with ThinKom Solutions, Inc., Mantaro Networks, Inc., Vitesse Semiconductor Corporation, and Core Source, LLC. The company was co-founded by Louis S. Slaughter and Douglas G. Lockie in 2004. GigaBeam Corporation is headquartered in Herndon, Virginia. With 6.02 million shares outstanding and 329,181 shares declared short as of December 2006, there is a failure to deliver in shares of GGBM.

Ibis Technology Corporation (NASDAQ: IBIS) engages in the development, manufacture, and marketing of Separation by Implantation of Oxygen and Silicon-On-Insulator (SIMOX-SOI) implantation equipment for the semiconductor industry worldwide. SIMOX is a form of SOI technology that creates an insulating barrier below the top surface of a silicon wafer. The company?s proprietary oxygen implanters produce SIMOX-SOI wafers by implanting oxygen atoms just below the surface of a silicon wafer to create a very thin layer of silicon dioxide between the thin operating region of the transistor at the surface and the underlying silicon wafer itself. The buried layer of silicon dioxide acts as an insulator for the devices fabricated on the surface of the silicon wafer and reduces the electrical current leakage. Its SIMOX-SOI wafers and finished integrated circuits are used in various commercial applications, including servers and workstations; portable and desktop computers; wireless communications and battery powered devices, such as laptop computers, personal digital assistants, and mobile phones; integrated optical components; and harsh-environment electronics. The company was founded in 1987 and is based in Danvers, Massachusetts. With 10.87 million shares outstanding and 625,589 shares declared short as of December 2006, there is a failure to deliver in shares of IBIS.

Cubic Energy Inc (OTCBB: QBIK) engages in the development and production of, and exploration for crude oil and natural gas principally in Texas and Louisiana, the United States. As of June 30, 2006, it had 17 wells of natural gas. The company had total proved reserves of approximately 8,863 barrels of crude oil and 2,796,900 thousand cubic feet of natural gas, as of above date. Cubic Energy was incorporated in 1978 and is based in Dallas, Texas. With 45.6 million shares outstanding and 14,922 shares declared short as of December 2006, there is a failure to deliver in shares of QBIK.

Walker Financial Corporation (OTCBB: WLKF) through its wholly owned subsidiaries, markets various insurance and trust administration services products. It offers prearrangement and preneed products, which allow individuals to secure the funding for their future funerals prior to their death and, in some incidences, the goods, materials, and services required in connection with such funerals. The company also provides general insurance management and third party marketing services for prearranged death care servicing to corporations, unions, and affinity groups. In addition, it offers trust administration services to independent funeral homes, state master trusts, and companies that own funeral homes or cemetery for preneed funeral and cemetery trust accounts. The company is based in Garden City, New York. With 15.95 million shares outstanding and an undisclosed short position, there is a failure to deliver in shares of WLKF.

Exobox Technologies Corp. (OTC: EXBX) operates as a network security development and licensing company. It develops licensed digital security technologies for a range of security-sensitive networks, devices, and other applications. The company offers SUEZ (Secure User Environment Zone) and SOS technologies, which stops cyber threats while eliminating the need for cyclic redundancy checking and viral database drive retroactive file scanning. Exobox Technologies has strategic alliances with Houston Technology Center; Open Systems Resources, Inc.; Comso, Inc.; National Institutes of Standards and Technology; Department of Homeland Security; and Osha Liang LLP. The company was founded in 2002 and is based in Houston, Texas. With 34.13 million shares outstanding and an undisclosed short position, there is a failure to deliver in shares of EXBX.

International Precious Metals Group (OTC: IPMG) is a company whose mandate is to find properties in gold and silver mining areas, that may present excellent opportunities for exploration and development. The Company is currently in the process of initiating development on the properties it owns and is also negotiating several high profile acquisitions that will provide excellent growth potential for the Company and its shareholder base. The goal of the Company is to cultivate and develop a portfolio of properties that will produce consistent income from which future acquisitions can be leveraged from. With 325.25 million shares outstanding and 136 shares declared short as of December 2006, there is a failure to deliver in shares of IPMG.

About BUYINS.NET

WWW.BUYINS.NET is a service designed to help bonafide shareholders of publicly traded US companies fight naked short selling. Naked short selling is the illegal act of short selling a stock when no affirmative determination has been made to locate shares of the stock to hypothecate in connection with the short sale. Buyins.net has built a proprietary database that uses Threshold list feeds from NASDAQ, AMEX and NYSE to generate detailed and useful information to combat the naked short selling problem. For the first time, actual trade by trade data is available to the public that shows the attempted size, actual size, price and average value of short sales in stocks that have been shorted and naked shorted. This information is valuable in determining the precise point at which short sellers go out-of-the-money and start losing on their short and naked short trades.

BUYINS.NET has built a massive database that collects, analyzes and publishes a proprietary SqueezeTrigger for each stock that has been shorted, www.buyins.net/squeezetrigger.pdf. The SqueezeTrigger database of nearly 1,150,000,000 short sale transactions goes back to January 1, 2005, and calculates the exact price at which the Total Short Interest is short in each stock. This data was never before available prior to January 1, 2005, because the Self Regulatory Organizations (primary exchanges) guarded it aggressively. After the SEC passed Regulation SHO, exchanges were forced to allow data processors like Buyins.net to access the data.

The SqueezeTrigger database collects individual short trade data on over 7,000 NYSE, AMEX and NASDAQ stocks and general short trade data on nearly 8,000 OTCBB and PINKSHEET stocks. Each month the database grows by approximately 50,000,000 short sale transactions and provides investors with the knowledge necessary to time when to buy and sell stocks with outstanding short positions. By tracking the size and price of each month's short transactions, BUYINS.NET provides institutions, traders, analysts, journalists and individual investors the exact price point where short sellers start losing money.

All material herein was prepared by BUYINS.NET, based upon information believed to be reliable. The information contained herein is not guaranteed by BUYINS.NET to be accurate, and should not be considered to be all-inclusive. The companies that are discussed in this opinion have not approved the statements made in this opinion. This opinion contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. This material is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as an offer or solicitation of an offer to buy or sell securities. BUYINS.NET is not a licensed broker, broker dealer, market maker, investment banker, investment advisor, analyst or underwriter. Please consult a broker before purchasing or selling any securities viewed on or mentioned herein. BUYINS.NET may receive compensation in cash or shares from independent third parties or from the companies mentioned.

BUYINS.NET affiliates, officers, directors and employees may also have bought or may buy the shares discussed in this opinion and may profit in the event those shares rise in value. Market commentary provided by Thomas Ronk.

BUYINS.NET will not advise as to when it decides to sell and does not and will not offer any opinion as to when others should sell; each investor must make that decision based on his or her judgment of the market.

This release contains "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended and such forward-looking statements are made pursuant to the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. "Forward-looking statements" describe future expectations, plans, results, or strategies and are generally preceded by words such as "may", "future", "plan" or "planned", "will" or "should", "expected," "anticipates", "draft", "eventually" or "projected". You are cautioned that such statements are subject to a multitude of risks and uncertainties that could cause future circumstances, events, or results to differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements, including the risks that actual results may differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements as a result of various factors, and other risks identified in a companies' annual report on Form 10-K or 10-KSB and other filings made by such company with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

You should consider these factors in evaluating the forward-looking statements included herein, and not place undue reliance on such statements. The forward-looking statements in this release are made as of the date hereof and BUYINS.NET undertakes no obligation to update such statements.

CONTACT: Thomas Ronk, CEO, www.buyins.net Tel: +1 800 715 9999 e-mail: Tom@buyins.net

M2 Communications Ltd disclaims all liability for information provided within M2 PressWIRE. Data supplied by named party/parties. Further information on M2 PressWIRE can be obtained at http://www.presswire.net on the world wide web. Inquiries to info@m2.com.

(C)1994-2007 M2 COMMUNICATIONS LTD

Print story

Current Quote

OTO: EXBX
Last: 0.430
Change: 0.030
Volume: 26,530
Day High: 0.480
Day Low: 0.400

January 29, 2007 - 8:50 AM EST Valero GP Holdings, LLC Reports Fourth Quarter 2006 Earnings and Announces Quarterly Distribution
Valero GP Holdings, LLC (NYSE:VEH) today announced earnings of $10.3 million, or $0.24 per unit, for the fourth quarter of 2006. For the six months ended December 31, 2006, earnings were $20 million, or $0.47 per unit. Distributable cash flow available to unitholders for the fourth quarter of 2006 was $13.5 million, or $0.32 per unit, and $27.0 million, or $0.64 per unit, for the six months ended December 31, 2006.

With respect to the quarterly distribution to unitholders payable for the fourth quarter of 2006, Valero GP Holdings, LLC also announced that it has declared a distribution of $0.32 per unit, or $1.28 per unit on an annual basis, which will be paid on February 16, 2007, to holders of record as of February 7, 2007.

A conference call with management is scheduled for 2:30 p.m. ET (1:30 p.m. CT) today to discuss the financial results for the fourth quarter of 2006. Investors interested in listening to the presentation may call 800-622-7620, passcode 5994994. International callers may access the presentation by dialing 706-645-0327, passcode 5994994. The company intends to have a playback available following the presentation, which may be accessed by calling 800-642-1687, passcode 5994994. A live broadcast of the conference call will also be available on the company's website at www.valerogpholdings.com.

Valero GP Holdings, LLC is a publicly traded limited liability company that owns the two percent general partner interest, a 21.4 percent limited partner interest and the incentive distribution rights in Valero L.P., one of the largest independent terminal and petroleum liquids pipeline operators in the nation with operations in the United States, the Netherlands Antilles, Canada, Mexico, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. For more information, visit Valero GP Holdings, LLC's website at www.valerogpholdings.com.

Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements

This press release includes forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 regarding future events and the future financial performance of Valero GP Holdings, LLC. All forward-looking statements are based on the company's beliefs as well as assumptions made by and information currently available to the company. These statements reflect the company's current views with respect to future events and are subject to various risks, uncertainties and assumptions. These risks, uncertainties and assumptions are discussed in Valero GP Holdings, LLC's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Valero GP Holdings, LLC
Consolidated Financial Information
December 31, 2006
(unaudited, thousands of dollars, except unit data and per unit data)


Three Months Ended Six Months Ended
December 31, 2006 December 31, 2006
------------------ -----------------
Statement of Income Data:
Equity in earnings of Valero
L.P. $10,842 $22,479

General and administrative
expenses (659) (1,536)
Other income (expense), net 167 (119)
Interest expense, net (10) (16)
Interest expense - affiliated - (901)
------------------ -----------------

Income before income tax
(expense) benefit 10,340 19,907
Income tax (expense) benefit (17) 113
------------------ -----------------
Net income $10,323 $20,020
================== =================

Basic and diluted net income per
unit $0.24 $0.47
================== =================

Equity in Earnings of Valero
L.P.:
General partner interest (2%) $674 $1,427
General partner incentive
distribution 3,909 7,818
Direct charges to Valero GP
Holdings, LLC (Note 1) (223) (575)
------------------ -----------------
General partner's interest in
earnings of Valero L.P. 4,360 8,670
Limited partner interest in
earnings of Valero L.P. 7,203 15,251
Amortization of step-up in
basis related to Valero L.P.'s
assets and liabilities (721) (1,442)
------------------ -----------------
Equity in earnings of Valero
L.P. $10,842 $22,479
================== =================


Distributable Cash (Note 2):
Cash distributions from Valero
L.P. associated with:
General partner interest (2%) $955 $1,910
Incentive distribution rights 3,909 7,818
Limited partner interest-
common units 9,347 18,697
------------------ -----------------
Total cash distributions from
Valero L.P. 14,211 28,425
Deduct expenses of Valero GP
Holdings, LLC:
General and administrative
expenses (659) (1,536)
Income tax (expense) benefit (17) 113
Interest expense, net - non-
affiliated (10) (16)
------------------ -----------------
Distributable cash $13,525 $26,986
================== =================

Units outstanding 42,500,000 42,500,000

Distributable cash flow per
unit $0.32 $0.64
================== =================

Cash distributions to be paid to
the unitholders of Valero GP
Holdings, LLC:
Distribution per unit (Note
3) $0.32 $0.58
================== =================

Distributions applicable to
public unitholders $13,600 $18,040
Distributions applicable to
Valero Energy - 9,160
------------------ -----------------
Total distributions $13,600 $27,200
================== =================


Valero GP Holdings, LLC
Consolidated Financial Information
December 31, 2006
(unaudited, thousands of dollars, except per unit data)

Notes:
1. We reimbursed Valero L.P. for these costs, and we were in turn
reimbursed by Valero Energy. Generally accepted accounting principles
require us to record this as an increase in our investment in Valero
L.P. and for Valero L.P. to record the full expense and record the
reimbursement as a capital contribution. Valero L.P. allocated 100%
of these costs to us because we paid the amounts in full.

2. Valero GP Holdings, LLC utilizes distributable cash as a financial
measure which is not defined in United States generally accepted
accounting principles. Management uses this financial measure because
it is a widely accepted financial indicator used by investors to
compare general partner performance. In addition, management believes
that this measure provides investors an enhanced perspective of the
ability to make a minimum quarterly distribution. Distributable cash
is not intended to represent cash flows for the period, nor is it
presented as an alternative to net income. It should not be
considered in isolation or as substitutes for a measure of
performance prepared in accordance with United States generally
accepted accounting principles.

The following is a reconciliation of net income to distributable cash
to net cash provided by operating activities (in thousands):

Three Months Ended Six Months Ended
December 31, 2006 December 31, 2006
------------------ -----------------
Net Income $10,323 $20,020

Adjustments to derive
Distributable Cash:
Equity in earnings of Valero
L.P. (10,842) (22,479)
Quarterly distribution from
Valero L.P. 14,211 28,425
Other (income) expense, net (167) 119
Interest expense - affiliated
(a) - 901
------------------ -----------------
Distributable cash 13,525 26,986

Adjustments to Distributable
Cash to derive Net Cash
Provided by Operating
Activities:
Quarterly distribution from
Valero L.P. (14,211) (28,425)
Cash distribution of equity
earnings received from Valero
L.P. 10,842 22,479
Interest expense - affiliated
(a) - (901)
Net effect of changes in
operating accounts 790 1,011
------------------ -----------------
Net cash provided by operating
activities $10,946 $21,150
================== =================

(a) In connection with our initial public offering, Valero Energy made
a capital contribution to us in the form of a note receivable,
including affiliated interest expense. Therefore, affiliated interest
expense is excluded from the calculation of distributable cash.


3. The reported distribution per unit for the period between the
closing of our initial public offering on July 19, 2006 and December
31, 2006 is prorated based upon the actual number of days we were
public and distributions of $0.64 per unit. Additionally, for the
period from July 1 - July 18, 2006 Valero Energy received 100% of our
distributions, which totaled $2.7 million.


Valero GP Holdings, LLC, San Antonio
Media, Mary Rose Brown, Senior Vice President,
Corporate Communications: 210-345-2314
or
Investors, Mark Meador, Senior Manager,
Investor Relations: 210-345-2895



Source: Business Wire (January 29, 2007 - 8:50 AM EST)

News by QuoteMedia
www.quotemedia.com

Windows Defender is weak
Friday, 26 January 2007 05:10 EST

Microsoft’s default malware blocking application and anti-virus programs may not fully protect Vista users, says security software vendor Webroot.

As part of the ongoing testing performed by Webroot’s Threat Research team, it was discovered that Windows Defender failed to block 84% of a testing sample-set that included 15 of the most common variations of existing spyware and malware. In addition, Windows Defender program’s performance was not in keeping with many third-party security applications.

Deficiencies in the Windows Vista security system extend beyond its spyware blocking problems. According to research from industry-leading anti-virus companies, Windows Vista is susceptible to some of the most common virus and malware threats due to issues with its user access controls and inability to detect some common viruses.

In addition, to enjoy the anti-virus protection, users must purchase the Microsoft Live OneCare suite for $49.95.

“We applaud Microsoft for the substantive improvements and exciting new features offered in Windows Vista. The various built-in applications, networking enhancements, and improved graphics support make for an impressive product,” said Gerhard Eschelbeck, CTO and SVP of engineering for Webroot Software.

“However, we want to make sure that users understand the Vista operating system’s limitations, and caution them that Microsoft’s default malware blocking application and anti-virus programs may not fully protect them. With the continued increase in the ingenuity and tenacity of cyber criminals and malware publishers, it is crucial for users to additionally deploy a proven computer security solution that provides real-time protection against all forms of spyware and viruses.”

Imgunnaretire...Nice to hear from you friend!

Keep your eye on the prize! :)

Agreed by 1Q07 is what the Team has promised us in the November 2005 PR.. :)


Eagle1

With Vista, Microsoft eyes twin security challenges
Revamped system aims to foil hackers -- and win part of a fast-growing market
By John Letzing, MarketWatch
Last Update: 8:07 PM ET Jan 26, 2007


SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) --The Sept. 11 terror attacks spurred beefed up security in airports, offices and just about every other public space. In a more indirect way, they're also likely to result in heightened defenses inside many of the world's computers beginning next week.
Microsoft Corp.'s quest to be a security company, among many other things, began when Bill Gates issued a memo in January 2002 to employees comparing 9/11 to a spate of high-profile virus attacks, many of them breaching the company's globally dominant software. Both 9/11 and the cyber attacks, Gates wrote, "reminded every one of us how important it is to ensure the integrity and security of our critical infrastructure, whether it's the airlines or computer systems."



Vista, the new operating system that Microsoft releases to consumers next week with a load of heavily touted, baked-in security features, is but one piece in its push into the fast-growing software-security market. But as its marquee product, it's also bound to serve as a bellwether for the company's progress in an area full of rich opportunity, as well as risk.



MSFT ) is betting that Vista -- its first major upgrade to of the operating system since October 2001 -- will help shed the company's long-held reputation among consumers for selling software that is rife with security flaws and thus vulnerable to hackers.
At the same time, the initiative is a bet that Vista, along with a stand-alone security application it rolled out last year, can help Microsoft capture some of the dollars that consumers now spend on products from smaller rivals like Symantec Corp. (SYMC ) and Mcafee (MFE )

But for all the effort and expectations, memories of the many bugs that have snarled Windows-based personal computers over the years have left Microsoft facing a legion of skeptics.

"Microsoft has made some progress, and I think they're in it for the long haul, but they have a long road ahead of them," said Chris Swenson, an analyst with the market research firm NPD Group Inc.

To be sure, one major factor behind Microsoft's spotty security history is the company's high profile -- its software runs an estimated 90% of the world's PCs -- which makes it a prized target of every scraggly-bearded coder who relishes the mad glory that comes from creating a little electronic chaos.
Yet the fact remains that Windows, along with the company's Web browser, Internet Explorer, and its Outlook e-mail program, have proven remarkably vulnerable to viruses, worms and other disruptive computer bugs.

Attacks on Microsoft products have included the "Code Red" worm, which hit Microsoft server software in July 2001 and wreaked havoc in corporate computer systems around the world, including the White House's official Web site.

Soon afterwards, in the early days of Vista's development, Gates typed out his "Trustworthy Computing" memo, referencing 9/11 and challenging his engineers to make security a top priority.

'Choose security'
"In the past, we've made our software and services more compelling for users by adding new features and functionality," Gates wrote. "Now, when we face a choice between adding features and resolving security issues, we need to choose security."

It was a lofty goal, and the following year it became obvious how much higher Microsoft needed to erect its fences when the "Slammer" worm snarled global networks, again through a breach in the company's server software, which essentially is a higher-powered version of Windows.

Determined to put those kinds of embarrassments behind it, Microsoft took its time crafting a response. The result: Vista is laden with a host of new security features that, in the past, consumers have been forced to buy from stand-alone security firms.

Among Vista's defenses are a firewall that filters both incoming and outgoing Internet traffic, and so-called "User Account Control," a tool that forces users to actively sign in to their network each time they want to install or run a particular program, just to make sure the proper person is at the controls.

Vista, which was offered to the corporate market in November, also includes a bolstered Internet browser, with protections against the many forms of spyware and other types of so-called "malware" that can seize control of a user's machine -- the kinds of menaces that have made surfing the Web a risky proposition.
Taken together, the features are enough to garner some respect among software security firms, including Symantec, whose Norton line of consumer applications ranks it the No. 1 seller of security software.

"We see in Vista a number of technologies that make it a better, more secure platform," said Laura Garcia-Manrique, senior director of product management at Symantec.

Still, Garcia-Manrique says that Vista forces users to adjust too many of their own security settings, and she remains confident that consumers will prefer to buy their security software from someone other than Microsoft.

"The security enhancements in Vista don't replace security packages," Garcia-Manrique said.

'Prettier product'
And many long-time Microsoft watchers agree.
Vista is "a prettier product with better security, but I'd say it's like with a used car," said Rick Sherlund, the veteran software analyst at Goldman Sachs. "Used cars run fine, but people just want to buy a new car because it looks cool," so consumers are still likely to buy add-ons from other software vendors.

Such security add-ons have been the stars of U.S. consumer software business in recent years. They boasted sales growth of 18% from 2000 through 2006 vs. flat to slightly negative growth for overall PC software sales, including game titles, according to NPD's Swenson.

One of the main reasons that analysts are less than bowled over by Vista: Even though Microsoft took years to develop it, its features don't go far beyond what the company had already incorporated into other product updates.

For years, Microsoft has allowed consumers to get automatic software updates, known as service packs, which users can download from the Web to plug known security holes. Indeed, the company addressed some of its worst security problems with an update to Windows XP, the name of the last operating system to come out before Vista.

"Vista does a better job with security, though Microsoft already went a long ways with Service Pack 2 and Windows XP," Sherlund said. While XP was released in 2001, Service Pack 2 appeared in 2004.

Still, while the opinions of analysts like Sherlund are important, the true test of Vista will come when it's released into the wilds of the marketplace.

Even for a super-sized company like Microsoft, the consumer-security software market is attractive, with double-digit annual sales growth. That's especially true in light of the fact that Microsoft units that include Windows and its Office business applications have eked out year-over-year growth rates of less than 10% in the last few years.

Geek influence
A majority of stand-alone security software in the U.S. is sold to consumers at retail channels including stores like Best Buy Co. Inc. Swenson says the tech-support advisers working for such retailers, such as Best Buy's Geek Squad staff, can play a decisive role in influencing which titles get purchased.

Microsoft started its foray into the stand-alone security application business in May of last year when it released an anti-virus product called OneCare. Three months later, in another sign of how serious Microsoft is about its security push, it poached Vincent Gullotto, an anti-virus guru, away from McAfee.

Yet Microsoft has made modest inroads with consumers, capturing just 1.7% of security software sales in 2006. Symantec remained the dominant player, with a 61% share. McAfee, which reorganized its product line in response to the Microsoft incursion, garnered 9.3%, according to NPD Group.

Neil MacDonald, an analyst with the market research firm Gartner Inc., said Microsoft's entry into the security market should have a negligible effect on companies such as Symantec, McAfee and Trend Micro Inc. -- as long as those players continue to innovate.

"In typical Microsoft fashion, the security capabilities of Vista are good, but for a percentage of the population they won't be good enough, and they will turn to (independent) vendors for that," MacDonald said.

That "percentage" can be significant. Symantec, for example, leans heavily on the consumer side of its business.
In the three-month period that ended in December, Symantec reported sales in its consumer business grew 24% from the year-earlier period, while its corporate product lines saw only single-digit or negative sales growth. Symantec recorded $409 million in revenue from consumer sales, and $904 million from all of its other product lines.

Already, a batch of security flaws were discovered in Vista in December, a vivid reminder about the obstacles inherent in the challenge that Gates issued to his troops five years ago.

"We'll always have a lot of work ahead of us," said Michael Sievert, Microsoft's vice president for windows client marketing. "But it's a priority and we've made a serious investment."
Starting next week, the company will find out whether consumers appreciate the investment.
John Letzing is a MarketWatch reporter based in San Francisco.
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/microsofts-vista-gambit-foil-hackers/story.aspx?guid=%7b075792...

Mach...it would seem that they may need to read the patent issued by Exobox...LOL

Fact: We beat Microsoft to the PUNCH ...

Get it?

Got it?

Go Exobox!
http://www.exoboxtech.com/

Major Exobox Event: Patent Issued December 5, 2006
http://tinyurl.com/yke42b

United States Patent 7,146,640
Goodman , et al. December 5, 2006

Eagle1,

P.S. Are we here yet?





Exobox: Our mission is to become the leading developer of licensed digital security technologies for a broad range of security-sensitive networks, devices, and other applications.

"We are uniquely positioned for the development and market introduction of what we believe is the most advanced computer security system available."

Local...that would increase the market cap as well.

If they do convert all their shares to common, they just cannot sell to many at will into the market according to rule 144 right?

Its interesting that they did not already convert long ago when they first could have...why now?

Hmm..lets think about this..

Low float+ higher market cap...could add some new dynamics...


Eagle1,

HI Shakerzzz...

Whats kicking friend?

Hey, Do you got your seat yet? Get your first class ticket now and strap in...the EXBX Golden Cross is coming soon!!!




Get it?

Got it?

Go Exobox!
http://www.exoboxtech.com/



Posted by: shakerzzz
In reply to: Stock Analyzer who wrote msg# 3061 Date:1/25/2007 9:50:26 PM
Post #of 3096

i need some winnerzzz sa > letzz find dem gemzzz and run with them lol


>

Good Nite Stock Analyzer!

Ever heard of the Golden Cross? LOL

Eagle1,




Go Exobox!
http://www.exoboxtech.com/

Eagle1

Major Exobox Event: Patent Issued December 5, 2006
http://tinyurl.com/yke42b

United States Patent 7,146,640
Goodman , et al. December 5, 2006



Exobox Roadmap to Success PR from November 28, 2005.

Exobox Technologies Engages Open Systems Resources; OSR to Write Company's Software Development Plan
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_2005_Nov_28/ai_n15879283

Exobox White Papers provided by OSR as promised via the November 28, 2005 PR.
http://www.exoboxtech.com/White%20Paper%20Support%20Doc.pdf

Exobox is Listed on S&P Market Access Program
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_2005_Nov_17/ai_n15857578

Exobox Strategic Alliances incuding the Department of Homeland Security, OSR, NIST, HTC, Cosmo.
http://www.exoboxtech.com/alliances.html

Open Systems Resources, Inc.
http://www.osr.com/
OSR is the world leader in low-level manipulation of the Microsoft Windows operating environment. OSR signed an agreement with Exobox in October, 2005, to produce for Exobox an economically viable software requirements document and an initial product ready for sale or license to the identified markets.

Comso, Inc.
http://www.comso.com/
A U.S. General Services Administration contractor, Comso is a software engineering and application development company. As a certified contractor, Comso provides government agencies a variety of technical services through a simple, straightforward ordering purchase system. Comso has agreed to use its GSA status to help Exobox obtain government funds and distribute the Company’s products on the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Commerce Information Technology Solutions list.

Cosmo Government Client List:
Department of Commerce
Department of Defense
Department of Interior
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
Housing and Urban Development
Intelligence Community
Maryland State Government
NASA
National Weather Service
National Environmental, Satellite, Data and Information Services (NESDIS)
Patent and Trademark Office
Resolution Trust Corporation
United States Postal Service

Cosmo Commercial Client List:
Allied Signal Technical Service
Computer Sciences Corporation
Lockheed Martin
Midland Data Systems
NCR
Ogden Government Services
PRC
Science Applications International Corporation
Westinghouse


Department of Homeland Security
http://www.dhs.gov/dhspublic/index.jsp
Exobox has met with the Department of Homeland Security to review the Company’s technology and the department indicated a willingness to help Exobox prove the Company’s products developed from its already validated technology. It also pledged to help Exobox gain governmental acceptance and distribution for such products.



>

Exobox Team = Methodical Surgical Precision Handling!


We are this point, because we have some EXTREMELY Smart Folks running our Exobox Investment..IMO.

Facts don't lie...

Everyone take special note of the 200 MA :))) She is closing in and the Golden Cross is Near ...

Golden Cross
A crossover involving a security's short-term moving average (such as 50-day moving average) breaking above its long-term moving average (such as 200-day moving average) or resistance level.



LOW FLOAT + Unrivaled Technology = Kaboom...Boom Boom...

The payload is SUEZ and SOS and I'm buckled up with Extra Oxygen...hopefully K-9 is not out of O2 yet down in the bunker....LOL




Get it?

Got it?

Go Exobox!
http://www.exoboxtech.com/

Eagle1

Major Exobox Event: Patent Issued December 5, 2006
http://tinyurl.com/yke42b

United States Patent 7,146,640
Goodman , et al. December 5, 2006



>

Thanks for the call Localinvestor!

Guess what?

I Trust the Team, cause the TEAM is producing...

Eagle1,

P.S.

Major Exobox Event ~ Patent ISSUED December 5, 2006
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=15375482

ISSUED Patent for Exobox, US Patent Office
http://tinyurl.com/yke42b
United States Patent 7,146,640
Goodman , et al. December 5, 2006


EXBX White Papers:
http://www.exoboxtech.com/White%20Paper%20Support%20Doc.pdf


Exobox Roadmap to Success PR from November 28, 2005.

Exobox Technologies Engages Open Systems Resources; OSR to Write Company's Software Development Plan
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_2005_Nov_28/ai_n15879283

Exobox White Papers provided by OSR as promised via the November 28, 2005 PR.
http://www.exoboxtech.com/White%20Paper%20Support%20Doc.pdf

Exobox is Listed on S&P Market Access Program
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_2005_Nov_17/ai_n15857578

Exobox Strategic Alliances incuding the Department of Homeland Security, OSR, NIST, HTC, Cosmo.
http://www.exoboxtech.com/alliances.html

Open Systems Resources, Inc.
http://www.osr.com/
OSR is the world leader in low-level manipulation of the Microsoft Windows operating environment. OSR signed an agreement with Exobox in October, 2005, to produce for Exobox an economically viable software requirements document and an initial product ready for sale or license to the identified markets.

Comso, Inc.
http://www.comso.com/
A U.S. General Services Administration contractor, Comso is a software engineering and application development company. As a certified contractor, Comso provides government agencies a variety of technical services through a simple, straightforward ordering purchase system. Comso has agreed to use its GSA status to help Exobox obtain government funds and distribute the Company’s products on the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Commerce Information Technology Solutions list.

Cosmo Government Client List:
Department of Commerce
Department of Defense
Department of Interior
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
Housing and Urban Development
Intelligence Community
Maryland State Government
NASA
National Weather Service
National Environmental, Satellite, Data and Information Services (NESDIS)
Patent and Trademark Office
Resolution Trust Corporation
United States Postal Service

Cosmo Commercial Client List:
Allied Signal Technical Service
Computer Sciences Corporation
Lockheed Martin
Midland Data Systems
NCR
Ogden Government Services
PRC
Science Applications International Corporation
Westinghouse


Department of Homeland Security
http://www.dhs.gov/dhspublic/index.jsp
Exobox has met with the Department of Homeland Security to review the Company’s technology and the department indicated a willingness to help Exobox prove the Company’s products developed from its already validated technology. It also pledged to help Exobox gain governmental acceptance and distribution for such products.

jpmbz....The fact that we have an EXOBOX ISSUED Patent, and not a PR about the ISSUED patent speaks HUGE volumes to me.

It so appears that the Exobox Team is utilizing "Methodical and Surgical Precision" handling of our investment, and I Trust that we are in very safe hands...

As a matter of Fact the Director is a Doctor..
Richard A. Evans, M.D. Director


The Team is letting their actions SPEAK LOUD and CLEAR that they are VERY SERIOUS IMO.

Were in very good hands, IMO....and I Trust the Team.

Be Sure to DD the Exobox Team here...
http://www.exoboxtech.com/company.html

Be sure to DD the Organizations allied with Exobox here...
http://www.exoboxtech.com/alliances.html



as of 12-17-2006

Authorized Shares: 500,000,000
Operating Shares: 34,134,197
Estimated Float: 12,000,000.

Major Exobox Event: Patent Issued December 5, 2006
http://tinyurl.com/yke42b

United States Patent 7,146,640
Goodman , et al. December 5, 2006

Eagle1,

P.S. Exobox is setting up so nice and I'm buckled in, but seats are running out fast...AIMHO!




>

~Thanks Everyone~

Go Exobox!
http://www.exoboxtech.com/

Eagle1,

Major Exobox Event: Patent Issued December 5, 2006,
http://tinyurl.com/yke42b

United States Patent 7,146,640
Goodman , et al. December 5, 2006 ,

Got a Sneak Peak Picture of EXOBOX Yesterday ...

The payload is SUEZ and SOS and I think it is going to be very explosive..(see pic at bottom..IMO)

Unrivaled Technology + Unrivaled Team + LOW FLOAT = Kaboom...Boom Boom...LOL





Get it?

Got it?

Go Exobox!
http://www.exoboxtech.com/

Eagle1

Major Exobox Event: Patent Issued December 5, 2006
http://tinyurl.com/yke42b

United States Patent 7,146,640
Goodman , et al. December 5, 2006



Exobox Roadmap to Success PR from November 28, 2005.

Exobox Technologies Engages Open Systems Resources; OSR to Write Company's Software Development Plan
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_2005_Nov_28/ai_n15879283

Exobox White Papers provided by OSR as promised via the November 28, 2005 PR.
http://www.exoboxtech.com/White%20Paper%20Support%20Doc.pdf

Exobox is Listed on S&P Market Access Program
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_2005_Nov_17/ai_n15857578

Exobox Strategic Alliances incuding the Department of Homeland Security, OSR, NIST, HTC, Cosmo.
http://www.exoboxtech.com/alliances.html

Open Systems Resources, Inc.
http://www.osr.com/
OSR is the world leader in low-level manipulation of the Microsoft Windows operating environment. OSR signed an agreement with Exobox in October, 2005, to produce for Exobox an economically viable software requirements document and an initial product ready for sale or license to the identified markets.

Comso, Inc.
http://www.comso.com/
A U.S. General Services Administration contractor, Comso is a software engineering and application development company. As a certified contractor, Comso provides government agencies a variety of technical services through a simple, straightforward ordering purchase system. Comso has agreed to use its GSA status to help Exobox obtain government funds and distribute the Company’s products on the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Commerce Information Technology Solutions list.

Cosmo Government Client List:
Department of Commerce
Department of Defense
Department of Interior
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
Housing and Urban Development
Intelligence Community
Maryland State Government
NASA
National Weather Service
National Environmental, Satellite, Data and Information Services (NESDIS)
Patent and Trademark Office
Resolution Trust Corporation
United States Postal Service

Cosmo Commercial Client List:
Allied Signal Technical Service
Computer Sciences Corporation
Lockheed Martin
Midland Data Systems
NCR
Ogden Government Services
PRC
Science Applications International Corporation
Westinghouse


Department of Homeland Security
http://www.dhs.gov/dhspublic/index.jsp
Exobox has met with the Department of Homeland Security to review the Company’s technology and the department indicated a willingness to help Exobox prove the Company’s products developed from its already validated technology. It also pledged to help Exobox gain governmental acceptance and distribution for such products.

Welcome jpmbz! Lots of Facts and links here on Exobox that points to it becoming very explosive.

Glad you made it over...

Eagle1,

P.S. Start here at last Q05.

Exobox Roadmap to Success PR from November 28, 2005.

Exobox Technologies Engages Open Systems Resources; OSR to Write Company's Software Development Plan
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_2005_Nov_28/ai_n15879283

Exobox White Papers provided by OSR as promised via the November 28, 2005 PR.
http://www.exoboxtech.com/White%20Paper%20Support%20Doc.pdf

Good Morning Everyone!

Eagle1,

Thank Doolittle...nice thoughts...

The Virtual Conflict - Who Will Triumph?
Jan 18 2007 | comment
http://www.viruslist.com/en/analysis?pubid=204791915

Yury Mashevsky
Virus Analyst, Kaspersky Lab


When the computer industry was just starting to evolve, no one could have guessed that relatively soon there would be a computer in every home. Today, many of us entrust our finances, personal correspondence, and much more to these machines.

Later, a skyrocketing number of users brought business to the Internet, leading to a rapid increase in network services. It would seem that Internet users were enjoying everything they could have wished for. But the arrival of cyber criminals, constantly searching for any and all opportunities to swindle unsuspecting users, changed everything.

Cyber criminals vs. IT security companies
Passive resistance
Active resistance
Cyber criminals vs. other companies
Cyber criminals vs. the government
Conclusion
Cybercrime has become an integral part of the Internet, and the market for malware is expanding rapidly. Previously unknown malicious programs are multiplying at an exponential rate, as Figure 1 illustrates.


Fig. 1: Increase in the number of new malicious programs.
Source: Kaspersky Lab
Previously, when malicious programs were written by students in their free time, antivirus companies were able to effortlessly repel their attacks, but this has become increasingly difficult with every passing year. In the near future, IT security companies will probably be able to continue combating to some extent the ever-increasing amount of malicious programs, spam and other manifestations of cybercrime. However, the question now is not whether cybercrime can be eliminated, but the extent to which its evolution can be hindered.

The stumbling block in this bitter struggle is the user, the source of income for criminals. According to estimates from various organizations, cybercrime-related revenue now significantly exceeds the income of the antivirus industry. The battle is in full swing.

This article examines the current situation - what today’s cyber criminals are doing to thwart the efforts of IT security companies, and who may be able to affect the development of cybercrime in the foreseeable future.

Cyber criminals vs. IT security companies
IT security companies are currently the main - and practically the only - force capable of taking successful action against cybercrime. Malicious users are constantly inventing new and improved ways to get around today’s technology, which drives the IT security industry to develop new means of protection. The conflict between the security industry and cyber criminals has evolved in an unusual way; cyber criminals don't always rush to be the first to take on new security technologies, each of which first undergoes scrupulous "durability" testing.

This was clearly demonstrated by Blue Security and its Blue Frog project, which was initially positioned as a successful antispam solution. At first, everything worked well - some Blue Frog users saw a 25% decline in the volume of unwanted correspondence they received. A year later, the project was causing huge problems for spammers, which ultimately led to its demise: Blue Frog was closed down after a series of powerful DDoS attacks.

It's not a bed of roses in the antivirus industry, either. Cyber criminal activity comes in different forms, from a stream of relatively insignificant threats, which can be easily combated, to full-scale, multi-partite attacks on antivirus solutions.

Examples of threats caused by smaller attacks include the following:

The authors of the Bagle worm tracked antivirus companies’ attempts to access a malicious website used by the worm and placed an absolutely clean file on this site. This meant that antivirus companies would not be able to obtain or analyze the authors’ malicious “creation", and, consequently, would not be able to add it to antivirus databases. But when regular users opened the link, malicious code would be downloaded to the victim machine.
The authors of Trojan-PSW.Win32.LdPinch continually track firewall activity. When the firewall displays a warning asking whether or not an application activity linked to the Trojan is permitted, the Trojan itself will 'click' on yes.
Cyber criminals or other malicious users mass mail malicious programs disguised as updates from antivirus companies on a regular basis. This is done in order to discredit the companies concerned.
There has been nothing really new in terms of multi-partite approaches used to combat antivirus solutions. The methods currently used can be divided into two categories:

passive resistance;
active resistance.
Passive resistance
Passive resistance employs methods that make it difficult to analyze and/or detect malicious content. There are many approaches that can be applied for these purposes (dynamic code generators, polymorphism, etc.), but in most cases, the authors of malicious programs don't spend much time or effort on developing these types of mechanisms. They use a much simpler solution in order to achieve their goals: so-called packers. These are utilities that use dedicated algorithms to encode the target executable program while retaining its functionality. The use of packers makes a malicious user's task much easier: in order to prevent an antivirus program from detecting an already known malicious program, the author no longer has to rewrite it from scratch - all he has to do is re-pack it with a packer that is not known to the antivirus program. The result is the same, and the costs are much lower.

As described above, most executable malicious files are packed in this manner. Figure 2, below, shows the number of packed malicious programs compared to the number of new malicious programs.


Fig. 2: Increase in the amount of packed samples (less than 1% error margin in identifying samples packed by unknown packers).
Source: Kaspersky Lab
The continued increase in the number of packed samples in the overall number of new, previously unknown malicious programs demonstrates that malicious users are confident that using packers is effective.

Clearly, it doesn't make much sense to use packers that antivirus programs can already detect - the original malicious code will, as a result, still be caught by the antivirus product. This is why more and more often, cyber criminals are now using packers that are not known to the antivirus industry; these are circulated as 'off-the-shelf' packers, modified or reworked by the authors themselves. The increase in the number of new malicious programs packed using packers that are not recognized by Kaspersky Anti-Virus are shown in figure 2.

Recently, we have seen more and more so-called “sandwiches”. This is where one malicious program is packed using several packers at once in hopes that antivirus programs will not be able to detect at least one of the packers. The increase in the use of "sandwiches" in relation to the number of new packed malicious programs is shown in figure


Fig. 3: Increase in the number of “sandwiches” in the total number of new packed samples.
Source: Kaspersky Lab
Virtual machines and emulators are very efficient at analyzing packed malicious code. Having understood this, virus writers have responded by creating more malicious programs which use code that combats antivirus technologies. In turn, antivirus companies responded with more refined technologies, leading to yet another turn of the screw…

Active resistance

Fig. 4: Increase in the number of new modifications of malicious programs that actively combat security solutions.
Source: Kaspersky Lab
The continued acceleration of the increase in new malicious programs (fig.1) is now accompanied by an increase in the total number of malicious programs which actively combat antivirus solutions. First and foremost, this involves virus writers using rootkit technologies in order to increase the lifespan of a virus in the infected system: if a malicious program has stealth capabilities, then it is less likely to end up in an antivirus company’s database.

Previously, virus writers targeted a handful of antivirus solutions. These days it's easy to find malicious programs which destroy dozens - if not hundreds - of security solutions.

Despite the efforts of cyber criminals, antivirus companies are relatively quick to develop and implement security mechanisms which have already slowed the increase in the number of malicious programs which combat antivirus solutions. In addition to this, they have also implemented anti-rootkit technologies.

Cyber criminals have responded with malicious programs with built-in drivers: kernel mode code which has rights enabling it to control the system, rather than standard code, is used to eliminate the antivirus solution. One example of this type of malicious program is Email-Worm.Win32.Bagle.gr.

Cyber criminals are also attacking on other fronts. For example, the authors of the Warezov worm are releasing modifications to their worm faster and faster in order to make the lives of antivirus companies more difficult.

The window of opportunity between an exploit appearing after the corresponding patch for a vulnerability is released is also on the decline, and cyber criminals are well aware of this. Malicious programs are constantly evolving and moving to new environments.

In terms of the successes of the antivirus industry, one example is the decreased interest shown by virus writers in email traffic. Today’s cyber criminals now find it ineffective to spread their malicious programs via email, even though this used to be a popular method. The difference is that today, malicious code can be quickly detected and blocked even before a mass mailing has been completed. Nevertheless, malicious users have no intention of giving up and they have already increased their use of websites to spread malicious programs.

Cyber crime is putting relentless, increased pressure on IT security companies. Increased illegal revenue allows cyber criminals to hire highly qualified accomplices and develop new attack technologies. Over the next several years, IT security companies will be able to use all their resources to reduce the pressure exerted by malicious users, but it will become ever more difficult. Only time can tell what will happen next.

Cyber criminals vs. other companies
Companies which only yesterday had been victims, and exhausted by the endless attacks both on their own infrastructures and those of their clients, have now begun to show teeth. One could say that 2004 and 2005 were the years during which the Internet became fully criminalized and during which the number of new viruses skyrocketed. But 2006 was the year when business began to acknowledge the problem presented by cyber crime.

One example is the financial organizations that independently began to take measures to frustrate cyber criminals. Last year, banks everywhere introduced various methods aimed at making registration more secure, ranging from one-time passwords to biometric authentification. This made it much more difficult for malicious users to develop new viruses targeting the financial sector.

More and more frequently software solutions provide online notification about new patches, but unfortunately, malicious users respond much faster to these notifications than do regular users. Developers’ response time to new patch releases is also gradually getting shorter.

Cyber criminals vs. the government
Governments possess the most extensive and powerful means to fighting cybercrime, but they are also one of the slowest-moving participants in the battle against cybercrime. The time when the situation could have been brought under control is long past.

Crime on the Internet has become so widespread that the authorities simply don't have sufficient resources to tackle a significant number of all crimes committed. It is extremely difficult for law enforcement bodies to work under conditions in which criminal acts are not limited by nation-state borders (malicious users can maintain a server in one country, attack users in another, and actually be physically located in a third country). Moreover, the infrastructure of the Internet allows cyber criminals to act at lightning-fast speed while maintaining anonymity.

Furthermore, the government system moves very slowly. A great deal of valuable time is spent on the decision-making process and reaching agreement at different levels. By the time a government agency gets around to investigating cyber criminals, they will have already moved on from their initial physical location and will have changed the hosting service they use more than once.

These days, government structures are similar to the victims of cybercrime, rather than those combating cyber criminals. There are a number of examples which uphold this claim, all of which were given wide coverage in the media:

Almost every major international political conflict spills over onto the Internet, becoming a conflict between cyber criminals in the conflicting countries, which can later be seen in the hacking of government websites. This happened in late 2005, when political debates about the ownership of fishing territories led to a conflict between malicious users in Peru and Chile. This same phenomenon was also seen in the Lebanon-Israel conflict, during which dozens of Israeli, Lebanese and American websites were attacked on a weekly basis. The standoff between cyber vandals in Japan and China and the US and China have been going on for some time now. Nearly all defacements of government websites which result from squabbles regarding international relations remain unpunished.
When malicious users are unhappy with the actions of one government or another, we often see DDoS attacks against that country, or other types of malicious action. This happened to Japan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs in autumn 2006, when a DDoS attack was carried out on the Ministry’s site, as a protest against an official visit to a "militant" temple. This also happened to Swedish government websites in early summer 2006 as a protest against the country’s anti-piracy measures.
Government structures are often viewed as a source of exclusive information that can be sold for good money on the black market or used in attacks. One excellent example is that of RusFinMonitoring (the Russian Financial Monitoring Service), which registers one-time transactions exceeding $20,000. According to the deputy head of the agency, hackers try to gain access to its computer system on a daily basis in order to get their hands on new information about bank clients.
Having acknowledged the scale and serious nature of cybercrime, the authorities are trying to address the problem. Although government agencies have not been quick off the mark, they have begun to take the following steps:

In order to facilitate interaction and accelerate response time, the law enforcement agencies of various countries are making attempts to create a cyber-Interpol;
In summer 2006 at the regional ASEAN Forum, a decision was made to create a common network for reporting computer-related crimes and to apply recommendations on counteracting cybercrime and other relevant information;
In summer 2006, the US Senate ratified the decision to join the European agreement on the fight against cybercrime, which has already been signed by several dozen countries;
A number of countries are discussing proposals to make current legislation stricter (Russia, Great Britain, and others).
According to government officials, the measures that have been taken so far are making a big difference in the fight against cybercrime and terrorism and will enable law enforcement officials to solve cybercrimes more quickly. Of course, it will take time for this to happen; currently, cyber criminals barely notice that anyone at government level is trying to thwart their efforts. This reaction - or lack thereof - more or less stems from the fact that malicious users are completely ignoring government efforts. The measures that have been taken so far haven't so much as scratched the surface. There is one positive point here, however, which is that the government machine has finally ground into action, and it is moving in the right direction.

Conclusion
Today, only IT security companies are capable of combating cybercrime. But the situation is deteriorating, and at an ever increasing rate. Every year it’s becoming harder and harder to ensure security.

Cybercrime is becoming increasingly more organized and more consolidated. Unfortunately, from our point of view, co-operation is not yet widespread enough. Antivirus companies, the government and other companies are not very keen on sharing information with one another, which often leads to valuable time being lost, hindering the investigation of cybercrimes and the introduction or enforcement of appropriate measures.

There's no doubt that it’s still possible to remedy the situation, but this will require a concerted effort. In addition to developing and launching new security technologies, a united front, with the active participation of all those involved in the fight against cybercrime, is the only thing that will make a real difference.

Source:
Kaspersky Lab

----------------------------------------------------------------


Major Exobox Event ~ Patent ISSUED December 5, 2006
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=15375482

ISSUED Patent for Exobox, US Patent Office
http://tinyurl.com/yke42b

Stock Analyzer, your right the board is growing quite fast!

Great things going on here! Thanks for your efforts!

Hey, FYI, I added this in the EXBX IBox...

Please Visit Stock Analyzer's Technical Board
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/board.asp?board_id=7882


Have a Great Weekend!

Eagle1,

Hackers find new ways to beat anti-virus tools
by Bill Goodwin
Friday 19 January 2007
Virus writers are using sophisticated technology to fight back against anti-virus suppliers, a report from Kaspersky Lab reveals.

Hackers are developing websites that load Trojans onto end-users’ machines but delivered innocuous files to anti-virus companies....

Article Continues Below
...

Other Trojans monitor firewalls and automatically click yes to alerts asking if the Trojan’s activity is permitted.

Another technique is to wrap known viruses in multiple packets, known as packers, which hide the file from virus scanners.

Kaspersky said that cybercriminals were modifying existing packers at a rapid rate to evade anti-virus signatures.

The percentage of viruses that contain payloads which target anti-virus software is also growing.

Malicious programs now exist that are designed to destroy dozens, if not hundreds, of security solutions.

Cybercriminals have responded to security counter-measures introduced by anti-virus companies by creating viruses with kernel-mode code which can modify the operating system.

“Over the next several years, IT security companies will be able to use all their resources to reduce the pressure exerted by malicious users, but it will become ever more difficult,” the report concluded.

More information:

www.viruslist.com

Comment on this article: computer.weekly@rbi.co.uk

Computer virus uses European storms to spread quickly
Jan 19, 10:47 AM ET

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20070119/tc_afp/internetitviruscrime
HELSINKI (AFP) - A computer virus has made use of storms sweeping across Europe to infect email systems and spread rapidly before dying down, a Finnish IT security company has said.

ADVERTISEMENT

The virus appeared in emails with the subject line "230 dead as storm batters Europe" and attachments bearing names such as "Full Clip.exe", "Full Story.exe", "Read More.exe" and "Video.exe".

The programme infects computers when users click on the message.

"A significant network attack was launched globally in the early hours of Thursday morning using news of a European storm as the hook to lure the unsuspecting," anti-virus programme producer F-Secure said in a statement.

The company, which ranked the virus a two on its scale of three, said several hundred thousand email addresses had received the virus but only a few thousand people were believed to have opened the infected attachment.

By Friday at 4:00 pm (1400 GMT), the epidimic was almost neutralised.

"The situation is not changing anymore. The virus was mostly targetting European users as it was sent out very early European time and reached European boxes when people woke up. It was not too interested in American audiences," chief research officer at F-Secure, Mikko Hyppoenen, said.

"It's dying, but users will be affected until the users realise they're infected and clean their machines," he said.

Anti-virus programmes automatically block viruses of this kind. Computer users who do not have such a programme can manually delete the message.

"What is significant here ... is the timely nature of this assault in relation to the European storm. Gangs are clearly using every technique and even tragedies like these to gain access to vulnerable machines," Hyppoenen said.

The virus was detected in Asia on Friday, where it was likely to have been created, F-Secure said.

"The likely intention is to create a new raft of zombie computers to steal information and to further propagate large-scale spam (unwanted email)," according to F-Secure.

The "Trojan" virus creates a backdoor in the computer that can be exploited later by the programme authors.

Countries across Europe on Thursday and Friday were hit by devastating storms that killed at least 40 people and left widespread damage and disruption to travel and power supplies.

HI Tx...Anyone want to take a stab at speculating on a possible PPS when Exobox Comes to market?

Eagle1,

Did everyone leave the building?

Eagle1,

T.J. Maxx, Marshalls Hacked
FRAMINGHAM, Mass. - TJX Cos., operator of T.J. Maxx and Marshalls discount stores, said Wednesday its computer systems were hacked late last year and customer data has been stolen. The company said the full extent of the intrusion is not yet known, but it is conducting a full investigation.

The hackers broke into a system that handles credit and debit card transactions, as well as checks and merchandise returns for customers in the U.S., Puerto Rico, and may also involve customers of T.K. Maxx stores in the U.K. and Ireland.

"Our first concern is the potential impact of this crime on our customers, and we strongly recommend that they carefully review their credit card and debit card statements and other account information for unauthorized use," TJX Chairman Ben Cammarata said in a statement.

The break-in was discovered in mid-December, but was kept confidential upon the request of law enforcement officials.

TJX said it has hired General Dynamics Corp. and IBM Corp. to upgrade its security system.

Shares of TJX fell 22 cents to close at $29.63 on the New York Stock Exchange.

The company posted advice on checking credit records on its Web site and said concerned customers can call (866) 484-6978 for more information.

---

On the Net:

TJX Cos.: http://www.tjx.com

Trojans and spyware 'dominated 2006'
17/01/2007

Trojans and spyware comprised more than half of all malicious code detected in 2006, according to one security firm.

PandaLabs said that it discovered adware and spyware to account for almost 40 per cent of total detections, with Trojans contributing 17 per cent of all malware.

The organisation said that the popularity of the internet has spurred hackers into creating more easily concealable methods of attack.

It also stated that diallers, backdoor Trojans, bots and worms also continued to plague users over the course of the year.

'Malware creators' intentions are clearer every day,' commented Mikel Perez, head of PandaLab's malware detection department.

'They have gone from competing for fame to trying to get rich through internet fraud.'

Meanwhile, IT Week recently reported research by Lightspeed Systems suggesting that some anti-virus products may be putting businesses at risk of attacks because they are failing to scan for active threats based on the internet.

http://www.bcs.org/server.php?show=conWebDoc.9563

Stock Analyzer: Thanks for the EXBX Ibox Update Chart!

Eagle1,

Posted by: Stock Analyzer
In reply to: None Date:1/17/2007 6:41:16 AM
Post #of 1103

EXBX .40 chart: updated in ibox too


http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=16264757

Stock Analyzer: Thanks for the EXBX Ibox Update Chart!

Eagle1,

Posted by: Stock Analyzer
In reply to: None Date:1/17/2007 6:41:16 AM
Post #of 1103

EXBX .40 chart: updated in ibox too


http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=16264757

HI Justastock... Been fine...

How you been friend?

Eagle1,

Posted by: justastock
In reply to: Eagle1 who wrote msg# 1728 Date:1/17/2007 12:35:00 AM
Post #of 1893

Eagle, how you been?

"When you lose don't lose the lesson"

Hi Stock...EXBX Chart Request!

Can you provide a detailed EXBX chart with the black Background for the EXBX Board ?

Thanks for the great TA Stock!

Eagle1,

P.S. EXBX DD

Exobox Technologies Corp.
http://www.Exoboxtech.com/

Stock Ticker: EXBX

as of 12-17-2006

Authorized Shares: 500,000,000
Operating Shares: 34,134,197
Estimated Float: 12,000,000

Facts: Exobox's Technology is Proven, Effective technology that stops all cyber threats such as viruses, Trojans, worms, spyware and identity theft. It is Proactive, not Reactive and doesn’t require a database of known malicious code. Compared to other technologies, Exobox's Technology is truly revolutionary, representing a paradigm shift from the largely ineffective "reactive" network security software currently available from others.

Major Exobox Event ~ Patent ISSUED December 5, 2006
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=15375482

ISSUED Patent for Exobox, US Patent Office
http://tinyurl.com/yke42b


Exobox Technologies Engages Open Systems Resources; OSR to Write Company's Software Development Plan
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_2005_Nov_28/ai_n15879283

Exobox White Papers provided by OSR as promised via the November 28, 2005 PR.
http://www.exoboxtech.com/White%20Paper%20Support%20Doc.pdf

Exobox is Listed on S&P Market Access Program
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is_2005_Nov_17/ai_n15857578

Exobox Strategic Alliances incuding the Department of Homeland Security, OSR, NIST, HTC, Cosmo.
http://www.exoboxtech.com/alliances.html

Open Systems Resources, Inc.
http://www.osr.com/
OSR is the world leader in low-level manipulation of the Microsoft Windows operating environment. OSR signed an agreement with Exobox in October, 2005, to produce for Exobox an economically viable software requirements document and an initial product ready for sale or license to the identified markets.

Comso, Inc.
http://www.comso.com/
A U.S. General Services Administration contractor, Comso is a software engineering and application development company. As a certified contractor, Comso provides government agencies a variety of technical services through a simple, straightforward ordering purchase system. Comso has agreed to use its GSA status to help Exobox obtain government funds and distribute the Company’s products on the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Commerce Information Technology Solutions list.

Cosmo Government Client List:
Department of Commerce
Department of Defense
Department of Interior
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
Housing and Urban Development
Intelligence Community
Maryland State Government
NASA
National Weather Service
National Environmental, Satellite, Data and Information Services (NESDIS)
Patent and Trademark Office
Resolution Trust Corporation
United States Postal Service

Cosmo Commercial Client List:
Allied Signal Technical Service
Computer Sciences Corporation
Lockheed Martin
Midland Data Systems
NCR
Ogden Government Services
PRC
Science Applications International Corporation
Westinghouse


Department of Homeland Security
http://www.dhs.gov/dhspublic/index.jsp
Exobox has met with the Department of Homeland Security to review the Company’s technology and the department indicated a willingness to help Exobox prove the Company’s products developed from its already validated technology. It also pledged to help Exobox gain governmental acceptance and distribution for such products.

Major Exobox Event: Patent Issued December 5, 2006
http://tinyurl.com/yke42b

United States Patent 7,146,640
Goodman , et al. December 5, 2006

Aloha from the States Cat! Hope your having fun!

Send some pics friend!

Eagle1,

Vista's UAC security is hopeless, says Symantec

Security News16 January 2007
By Matthew Broersma, Techworld

A key security feature of Windows Vista, User Account Control (UAC) is still nearly unusable, Symantec has said.

At a press presentation last week, Symantec vice president of engineering Rowan Trollope said Symantec's customers had found the feature so "chatty", that it was a burden on users, potentially creating new help-desk calls.

He said that personally he had found the feature so distracting he had finally turned it off - not a good sign for companies intending to use UAC to protect systems.

UAC allows administrators to create user accounts that have limited privileges, correcting what security experts perceive as a major weakness in previous versions of Windows. Previously, all Windows users were administrators, something nearly unheard of in the Linux/Unix world.

The change is designed to limit the damage malicious attacks can cause, and to put a damper on attacks that take over large numbers of systems. But it can only be effective if UAC is enabled on a large proportion of Windows systems.

The feature attracted criticism during the beta-testing process, from respected analysts among others, and Microsoft said it fine-tuned UAC.

Symantec does have a vested interest here - the company plans to sell products that smooth out UAC's alleged faults - but the company's findings could be evidence of spell additional headaches for system administrators considering Vista.

Symantec's idea is somewhat different; Trollope said the company is proposing to add an extra layer of "intelligence" on top of UAC which would make it easier to use. Such a plan will involve Microsoft's co-operation, Symantec acknowledged, but Microsoft security executives said the company was not yet aware of what Symantec has in mind.

Following Symantec's comments, Microsoft stood by its work. "If the user decides they do not want to run UAC and they would rather run a third-party solution that provides similar functionality, they do have the choice to disable it," Microsoft said in a statement.

Over recent months Microsoft has been moving toward bringing many basic security features under its own roof, providing its own firewall, antivirus and anti-spyware software, for example.
Symantec said users shouldn't get the idea that Vista no longer needs third-party security products - which, it admitted, would be a disaster for Symantec's own business.

So far, however, industry analysts have largely agreed with Symantec, saying Microsoft has yet to prove itself as a security provider, particularly at the enterprise level.

Trojans fuel ID theft boom
By John Leyden

Published Tuesday 16th January 2007 11:55 GMT
Identity theft, both offline and online, is on the rise with keylogging Trojan software often forming the weapon of choice for would-be fraudsters, according to a new study by net security firm McAfee.

McAfee reckons the number of keylogging malware packages increased 250 per cent between January 2004 and May 2006. The number of phishing attacks tracked by the Anti-Phishing Working Group has multiplied 100-fold over the same period of time, it notes.

A white paper (http://www.mcafee.com/us/threat_center/white_paper.html) on identity theft from McAfee runs through a number of identity theft techniques covering everything from dumpster diving to keylogging Trojans, alongside guidelines on how ordinary punters can guard their private data. Security tips include advice on recognising phishing emails and safe surfing tips such as keeping PC security packages up to date and avoiding the temptation of clicking links in email that point to potentially dodgy sites hosting malware.

Identity theft in all its various guises in one of the fastest growing crimes. Annual losses from the crime in the US alone are estimated at $50bn, according to figures (PDF (http://www.fdic.gov/consumers/consumer/idtheftstudy/identity_theft.pdf)) from consumer watchdog the Federal Trade Commission.

The Home Office estimates (http://www.identitytheft.org.uk) identity theft has cost the British economy a more modest $3.2bn over the last three years. ®



http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/01/16/mcafee_id_theft_trends/

Exobox = What Disruptive Technology is all About!

Exobox Management “expects” that EXOBOX’s Technology will soon be generally acknowledged as the “Disruptive Technology of Choice” for the Network Security Industry.

Major Exobox Event ~ Patent ISSUED December 5, 2006
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

http://www.investorshub.com/boards/read_msg.asp?message_id=15375482

ISSUED Patent for Exobox, US Patent Office
http://tinyurl.com/yke42b

Got Exobox?

~SUMMARY OF THE EXOBOX INVENTION~

The present data security technology eradicates the threat potential of malicious code downloaded from an external data source onto a personal computer or the like.

Malicious code includes viruses, trojans, worms and such that may be loaded onto a computer from an external data source, such as the Internet, a network or an external data device (i.e., a floppy drive, CD ROM disc, etc.).

A computer with an application of the present inventive software technology installed, will remain completely safe from intrusion from all currently known hacker intrusion technologies.

There can be no file theft, data corruption, or nuisance applications (e.g., viruses) run on the computer.

Nor will there be the downtime and technical service costs required to recover from exposure to these malicious codes.

The present inventive software technology does not rely on file scanners, virus definition patterns, Cyclical Redundancy Checks (CRC) checks, Name Address Translations (NAT), or similar strategies of current database driven security technologies.

Rather, the present inventive software technology exploits certain immutable hardware and software communication relationships underlying and basic to the system architecture of a computer to insure intrusion prevention.

Because the present inventive software technology is not database driven, it does not require malicious code definition updates.

Therefore, it is not susceptible to new malicious codes or to mutation of existing malicious codes.

Further, hackers, cyber-terrorists and internet predators cannot breech a computer system running the present inventive software even if they possessed the source code and the complete design specifications.

Again, this is because the security features of the present invention are not database dependent, but derive from the intrinsic architectural relationships of the computer's hardware and operating system software.

Implementation of the present inventive software technology is uncomplicated. If the user computer is on an intranet network, in most cases installation of the present inventive software will not require modifications of the user's existing intranet network.

We have developed two revolutionary, proprietary, patent-pending software technologies to meet this need in a unique, proactive way, providing 100% of such protection without affecting workflow or requiring a continuously updated database of known viruses.

Compared to other technologies, ours is truly revolutionary, representing a paradigm shift from the largely ineffective “reactive” network security software currently available from others.

Our SUEZ™ technology is a true solution that stops all cyber threats while eliminating the need for CRC (Cyclic Redundancy Checking) and viral database drive retroactive file scanning.

We are currently developing comprehensive product lines from our technology to provide complete and effective security for all servers and computers using our products


Get it?

Got it?

Go Exobox!
http://www.Exoboxtech.com/


Eagle1,

Thanks Txharvey....Sounds Good!

Eagle1,

Anyone Know if Exobox's Technology will work on the new iPhone?

Have a Great Day!

Eagle1,


Hackers can't wait for iPhone
The device could provide many avenues of attack, says hacker
By Robert McMillan, San Francisco | Monday, 15 January, 2007

Technology fetishists aren't the only people itching to get their hands on an iPhone. Hackers want to play with Apple's new toy, too.

Within hours of Apple's iPhone unveiling this week, the iPhone was a hot topic on the Dailydave discussion list, a widely read forum on security research.

Much of the discussion centered on the processor that Apple may have chosen to power its new device and what kind of assembly language "shellcode" might work on this chip. "Is this beast running an ARM? writes reverse-engineering expert Havlar Flake, "I have doubts about a mobile device being based on x86, so does anyone have details about what sort of shellcode needs to be written?"

In an email interview, one of the hackers behind the Month of Apple Bugs project, which is disclosing new Apple security vulnerabilities every day for the month of January, says he "would love to mess with" the iPhone.

"If it's really going to run OS X, [the iPhone] will bring certain security implications, such as potential misuses of wireless connectivity facilities, [and] deployment of malware in a larger scale," the hacker known as LMH writes in an email. He declined to provide his real name.

Because the device could include a range of advanced computing features, such as Apple's Bonjour service discovery protocol, it could provide many avenues of attack, according to LMH. "The possibilities of a worm for smartphones are something to worry about," he writes. " Imagine Bonjour, and all the mess of features that OS X has, concentrated in a highly portable device which relies on wireless connectivity."

"This is all speculation right now, until a technical specification is released by Apple on its features and technology," he adds.

David Maynor is another security researcher interested in the iPhone. Maynor's videotaped demonstration of a MacBook being hacked over a wireless network received widespread attention at last year's Black Hat USA conference, although Maynor and his co-presentor were later criticised for the way they presented their research. They demonstrated these flaws using a third-party wireless card rather than the one that ships with the MacBook, and they still have not published the code they used.

"I can't wait to get one," says Maynor, who is chief technology officer with Errata Security. "There's already a lot of discussion going on, and it's not coming out for another six months. People are salivating over it."

Because the iPhone will be new and relatively untested, but running a familiar operating system, Maynor believes that there will be plenty of places for hackers to look for bugs. "My feeling is that this is going to be one of the easier devices to find vulnerabilities in," he says.

But there is one other factor that will also help determine how often the iPhone is hacked: its popularity. If nobody buys the US$499 device, then it become less interesting to hackers.

On the other hand, if it becomes as popular as the iPod, it "will become the preferred target for writers of mobile malware," writes Kaspersky Lab. Senior Research Engineer Roel Schouwenberg in a recent blog posting.

The fact that hackers looking for OS X bugs would possibly have two platforms to exploit - Apple's computers and the iPhone - would "mean an increase in the number of vulnerabilities identified in Apple's workstation OS," he writes.

Apple seems to be aware of the problem. Although the company was unable to provide an executive who could comment on the security of its products during this week's Macworld conference, the company was quick to respond to Havlar Flake's question on the Dailydave discussion list.

"Do you really want to know the answer to this question?" writes Apple's Simon Cooper. "If so, then you should apply, get offered and accept the software security position I currently have open at Apple. This is work in Core OS for Mac OS X."
Copyright © Fairfax Business Media A Division of John Fairfax Publications Pty Limited, 2006 Privacy Policy

Congrats Stock Analyzer the "Technical Analysts Board" is a already a Success withing Two weeks!

Thanks!

Eagle1,

Hi Bull,

Eagle1,

Rule 144: Selling Restricted and Control Securities


When you acquire restricted securities or hold control securities, you must find an exemption from the SEC's registration requirements to sell them in the marketplace. Rule 144 allows public resale of restricted and control securities if a number of conditions are met. This overview tells you what you need to know about selling your restricted or control securities. It also describes how to have a restrictive legend removed.

What Are Restricted and Control Securities?
Restricted securities are securities acquired in unregistered, private sales from the issuer or from an affiliate of the issuer. Investors typically receive restricted securities through private placement offerings, Regulation D offerings, employee stock benefit plans, as compensation for professional services, or in exchange for providing "seed money" or start-up capital to the company. Rule 144(a)(3) identifies what sales produce restricted securities.

Control securities are those held by an affiliate of the issuing company. An affiliate is a person, such as a director or large shareholder, in a relationship of control with the issuer. Control means the power to direct the management and policies of the company in question, whether through the ownership of voting securities, by contract, or otherwise. If you buy securities from a controlling person or "affiliate," you take restricted securities, even if they were not restricted in the affiliate's hands.

If you acquire restricted securities, you almost always will receive a certificate stamped with a "restricted" legend. The legend indicates that the securities may not be resold in the marketplace unless they are registered with the SEC or are exempt from the registration requirements. The certificates of control securities are usually not stamped with a legend.

What Are the Conditions of Rule 144?
If you want to sell your restricted or control securities to the public, you can follow the conditions set forth in Rule 144. The rule is not the exclusive means for selling restricted or control securities, but provides a "safe harbor" exemption to sellers. The rule's five conditions are summarized below:

Holding Period. Before you may sell restricted securities in the marketplace, you must hold them for at least one year. The one-year period holding period begins when the securities were bought and fully paid for. The holding period only applies to restricted securities. Because securities acquired in the public market are not restricted, there is no holding period for an affiliate who purchases securities of the issuer in the marketplace. But an affiliate's resale is subject to the other conditions of the rule.

Additional securities purchased from the issuer do not affect the holding period of previously purchased securities of the same class. If you purchased restricted securities from another non-affiliate, you can tack on that non-affiliate's holding period to your holding period. For gifts made by an affiliate, the holding period begins when the affiliate acquired the securities and not on the date of the gift. In the case of a stock option, such as one an employee receives, the holding period always begins as of the date the option is exercised and not the date it is granted.


Adequate Current Information. There must be adequate current information about the issuer of the securities before the sale can be made. This generally means the issuer has complied with the periodic reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.


Trading Volume Formula. After the one-year holding period, the number of shares you may sell during any three-month period can't exceed the greater of 1% of the outstanding shares of the same class being sold, or if the class is listed on a stock exchange or quoted on Nasdaq, the greater of 1% or the average reported weekly trading volume during the four weeks preceding the filing a notice of the sale on Form 144. Over-the-counter stocks, including those quoted on the OTC Bulletin Board and the Pink Sheets, can only be sold using the 1% measurement.


Ordinary Brokerage Transactions. The sales must be handled in all respects as routine trading transactions, and brokers may not receive more than a normal commission. Neither the seller nor the broker can solicit orders to buy the securities.


Filing Notice With the SEC. At the time you place your order, you must file a notice with the SEC on Form 144 if the sale involves more than 500 shares or the aggregate dollar amount is greater than $10,000 in any three-month period. The sale must take place within three months of filing the Form and, if the securities have not been sold, you must file an amended notice.

If you are not an affiliate of the issuer and have held restricted securities for two years, you can sell them without regard to the above conditions.

Can the Securities Be Sold Publicly If the Conditions of Rule 144 Have Been Met?

Even if you have met the conditions of Rule 144, you can't sell your restricted securities to the public until you've gotten the legend removed from the certificate. Only a transfer agent can remove a restrictive legend. But the transfer agent won't remove the legend unless you've obtained the consent of the issuer—usually in the form of an opinion letter from the issuer's counsel—that the restricted legend can be removed. Unless this happens, the transfer agent doesn't have the authority to remove the legend and execute the trade in the marketplace.

To begin the process, an investor should contact the company that issued the securities, or the transfer agent of the company's securities, to ask about the procedures for removing a legend. Since removing the legend can be a complicated process, if you're considering buying or selling a restricted security, it would be wise for you to consult an attorney who specializes in securities law.

What If a Dispute Arises Over Whether I Can Remove the Legend?
If a dispute arises about whether a restricted legend can be removed, the SEC will not intervene. The removal of a legend is a matter solely in the discretion of the issuer of the securities. State law, not federal law, covers disputes about the removal of legends. Thus, the SEC will not take action in any decision or dispute about removing a restrictive legend.

http://www.sec.gov/investor/pubs/rule144.htm

The National Strategy to Secure Cyberspace

A White House Report

Cybersecurity is cited as a critical element of homeland security in a national strategy crafted by the Bush Administration.

http://usinfo.state.gov/journals/itgic/1103/ijge/gj11.htm

In February 2003, the White House released The National Strategy to Secure Cyberspace, a 76-page document outlining a sustained, multi-faceted approach to safeguarding the nation's vital communications technologies. The strategy was developed after several years of intense consultations among thousands of individuals -- officials at all levels of government, experts from the private sector, and other concerned citizens. The following excerpts reflect the course the United States is pursuing to protect the complex, interconnected, computer-based systems vital to today's society.

Critical Priorities for Cyberspace Security

The National Strategy to Secure Cyberspace articulates five national priorities including:

I. A National Cyberspace Security Response System;

II. A National Cyberspace Security Threat and Vulnerability Reduction Program;

III. A National Cyberspace Security Awareness and Training Program;

IV. Securing Governments' Cyberspace; and

V. National Security and International Cyberspace Security Cooperation.

The first priority focuses on improving our response to cyber incidents and reducing the potential damage from such events. The second, third, and fourth priorities aim to reduce threats from, and our vulnerabilities to, cyber attacks. The fifth priority is to prevent cyber attacks that could impact national security assets and to improve the international management of and response to such attacks.

Priority I: A National Cyberspace Security Response System

Rapid identification, information exchange, and remediation can often mitigate the damage caused by malicious cyberspace activity. For those activities to be effective at a national level, the United States needs a partnership between government and industry to perform analyses, issue warnings, and coordinate response efforts. Privacy and civil liberties must be protected in the process. Because no cybersecurity plan can be impervious to concerted and intelligent attack, information systems must be able to operate while under attack and have the resilience to restore full operations quickly.

The National Strategy to Secure Cyberspace identifies eight major actions and initiatives for cyberspace security response:

Establish a public-private architecture for responding to national-level cyber incidents;

Provide for the development of tactical and strategic analysis of cyber attacks and vulnerability assessments;

Encourage the development of a private sector capability to share a synoptic view of the health of cyberspace;

Expand the Cyber Warning and Information Network to support the role of DHS in coordinating crisis management for cyberspace security;

Improve national incident management;

Coordinate processes for voluntary participation in the development of national public-private continuity and contingency plans;

Exercise cybersecurity continuity plans for federal systems; and

Improve and enhance public-private information sharing involving cyber attacks, threats, and vulnerabilities.

Priority II: A National Cyberspace Security Threat and Vulnerability Reduction Program

By exploiting vulnerabilities in our cyber systems, an organized attack may endanger the security of our Nation's critical infrastructures. The vulnerabilities that most threaten cyberspace occur in the information assets of critical infrastructure enterprises themselves and their external supporting structures, such as the mechanisms of the Internet. Lesser-secured sites on the interconnected network of networks also present potentially significant exposures to cyber attacks. Vulnerabilities result from weaknesses in technology and because of improper implementation and oversight of technological products.

The National Strategy to Secure Cyberspace identifies eight major actions and initiatives to reduce threats and related vulnerabilities:


Enhance law enforcement's capabilities for preventing and prosecuting cyberspace attacks;

Create a process for national vulnerability assessments to better understand the potential consequences of threats and vulnerabilities;

Secure the mechanisms of the Internet by improving protocols and routing;

Foster the use of trusted digital control systems/supervisory control and data acquisition systems;

Reduce and remediate software vulnerabilities;

Understand infrastructure interdependencies and improve the physical security of cyber systems and telecommunications;

Prioritize federal cybersecurity research and development agendas; and

Assess and secure emerging systems.

Priority III: A National Cyberspace Security Awareness Training Program

Many cyber vulnerabilities exist because of a lack of cybersecurity awareness on the part of computer users, systems administrators, technology developers, procurement officials, auditors, chief information officers (CIOs), chief executive officers, and corporate boards. Such awareness-based vulnerabilities present serious risks to critical infrastructures regardless of whether they exist within the infrastructure itself. A lack of trained personnel and the absence of widely accepted, multilevel certification programs for cybersecurity professionals complicate the task of addressing cyber vulnerabilities.

The National Strategy to Secure Cyberspace identifies four major actions and initiatives for awareness, education, and training:

Promote a comprehensive national awareness program to empower all Americans -- businesses, the general workforce, and the general population -- to secure their own parts of cyberspace;

Foster adequate training and education programs to support the Nation's cybersecurity needs;

Increase the efficiency of existing federal cybersecurity training programs; and

Promote private-sector support for well-coordinated, widely recognized professional cybersecurity certifications.

Priority IV: Securing Governments' Cyberspace

Although governments administer only a minority of the Nation's critical infrastructure computer systems, governments at all levels perform essential services in the agriculture, food, water, public health, emergency services, defense, social welfare, information and telecommunications, energy, transportation, banking and finance, chemicals, and postal and shipping sectors that depend upon cyberspace for their delivery. Governments can lead by example in cyberspace security, including fostering a marketplace for more secure technologies through their procurement.

The National Strategy to Secure Cyberspace identifies five major actions and initiatives for the securing of governments' cyberspace:

Continuously assess threats and vulnerabilities to federal cyber systems;

Authenticate and maintain authorized users of federal cyber systems;

Secure federal wireless local area networks;

Improve security in government outsourcing and procurement; and

Encourage state and local governments to consider establishing information technology security programs and participate in information sharing and analysis centers with similar governments.

Priority V: National Security and International Cyberspace Security Cooperation

America's cyberspace links the United States to the rest of the world. A network of networks spans the planet, allowing malicious actors on one continent to act on systems thousands of miles away. Cyber attacks cross borders at light speed, and discerning the source of malicious activity is difficult. America must be capable of safeguarding and defending its critical systems and networks. Enabling our ability to do so requires a system of international cooperation to facilitate information sharing, reduce vulnerabilities, and deter malicious actors.

The National Strategy to Secure Cyberspace identifies six major actions and initiatives to strengthen U.S. national security and international cooperation:

Strengthen cyber-related counterintelligence efforts;

Improve capabilities for attack attribution and response;

Improve coordination for responding to cyber attacks within the U.S. national security community;

Work with industry and through international organizations to facilitate dialogue and partnerships among international public and private sectors focused on protecting information infrastructures and promoting a global "culture of security;"

Foster the establishment of national and international watch-and-warning networks to detect and prevent cyber attacks as they emerge; and

Encourage other nations to accede to the Council of Europe Convention on Cybercrime, or to ensure that their laws and procedures are at least as comprehensive.


The complete text of The National Strategy to Secure Cyberspace is available at www.whitehouse.gov/pcipb.



-----------------------------------------------------------------
Organizations allied with Exobox include:
http://www.exoboxtech.com/alliances.html


Department of Homeland Security
http://www.dhs.gov/dhspublic/index.jsp
Exobox has met with the Department of Homeland Security to review the Company’s technology and the department indicated a willingness to help Exobox prove the Company’s products developed from its already validated technology. It also pledged to help Exobox gain governmental acceptance and distribution for such products.

Comso, Inc.
http://www.comso.com/
A U.S. General Services Administration contractor, Comso is a software engineering and application development company. As a certified contractor, Comso provides government agencies a variety of technical services through a simple, straightforward ordering purchase system. Comso has agreed to use its GSA status to help Exobox obtain government funds and distribute the Company’s products on the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Commerce Information Technology Solutions list.

Cosmo Government Client List:
Department of Commerce
Department of Defense
Department of Interior
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
Housing and Urban Development
Intelligence Community
Maryland State Government
NASA
National Weather Service
National Environmental, Satellite, Data and Information Services (NESDIS)
Patent and Trademark Office
Resolution Trust Corporation
United States Postal Service

Cosmo Commercial Client List:
Allied Signal Technical Service
Computer Sciences Corporation
Lockheed Martin
Midland Data Systems
NCR
Ogden Government Services
PRC
Science Applications International Corporation
Westinghouse



Major Exobox Event: Patent Issued December 5, 2006

United States Patent 7,146,640
http://tinyurl.com/yke42b


EXBX White Papers:
http://www.exoboxtech.com/White%20Paper%20Support%20Doc.pdf


Eagle1,

Good Morning Doodlerose and all!

Thanks for your comments...and I agree, that there is absolutely nothing that makes me believe that the Team is not on track...according to the many facts set before us.

Safe hands? Yes sir!

Have a Great DAY!

Eagle1,