‘Nitro’ Hackers Reportedly Attack Dozens Of Companies In Chemical, Defense Industries | Fox News

Hackers reportedly used an off-the-shelf virus created in China to compromise the computers of nearly 50 companies, including in the chemical and defense industries — an attack described as being in the same family as the notorious Stuxnet virus, if not as severe.

The goal of the attacks, reported Monday by security software company Symantec, “appears to be to collect intellectual property such as design documents, formulas, and manufacturing processes,” the report said.

Symantec dubbed the attack “Nitro” and said a total of 29 companies in the chemical industry were targeted, in addition to 19 in other sectors. Among the companies were some that develop materials used primarily in military vehicles.

The infected computers spanned the globe, from the United States to Denmark to Saudi Arabia and Japan.

via ‘Nitro’ Hackers Reportedly Attack Dozens Of Companies In Chemical, Defense Industries | Fox News.

Do We Have the Luxury to Remain Compliance-Curious? | The Moscow Times

If you are a Russian company that is subject to the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) or U.K. Bribery Act (BA), now is an excellent time to switch from being merely FCPA or BA-curious to FCPA or BA-compliant.

There are a number of solid reasons for this. On the one hand there is the increased level of FCPA enforcement with an almost exponentially growing number of staff at the U.S. Department of Justice (DoJ) looking at Russia ever more closely. On the other hand, as if this were not enough, beginning this summer companies and individuals alike must now also contend with BA enforcement.

What does being compliant mean? It certainly does not mean you should attempt to structure business operations to avoid these two laws. The laws are statutes with long-arm jurisdictions and, as such, cast their nets far and wide. This means that, if you are an international company with a presence and/or a public listing in the United States and the United Kingdom, it is more likely than not that both the FCPA and the BA will apply to you. Furthermore, I would not trust the statement in the Official Guidance to the Bribery Act that a listing by itself will not constitute carrying out business or part of business in the United Kingdom. Instead, I would urge following what the SFO has said, which is that a listing by itself may be just enough to trigger BA jurisdiction.

Being compliant means you should have a proper compliance program in place. It is as “simple” as that.

Your compliance program should cover both the FCPA and BA. Careful analysis and review of existing enforcement practice indicate that, despite textual differences, the two laws are about similar prohibitions. For instance, it is true that the BA does not contain an exception for facilitation or “grease” payments, whereas the FCPA does. Note, however, that U.S. enforcement has rendered this FCPA exception practically obsolete. Commercial bribery is another example. The BA expressly prohibits commercial bribery, whereas the FCPA does not. Nevertheless, the DoJ has charged companies for commercial bribery in the past under the so-called books and records provisions of the FCPA, and with the help of jurisdictional mechanisms available under the U.S. Travel Act.

via Do We Have the Luxury to Remain Compliance-Curious? | The Moscow Times.

International Businessman Granted Bail – Law Blog – WSJ

Victor Dahdaleh, the prominent international businessman accused of bribing officials in Bahrain to score aluminum contracts for metals giant Alcoa has been granted bail in exchange for the equivalent of a $16 million security bond at a U.K. hearing.

Last week the U.K.’s SFO arrested Dahdaleh, a key figure in the bribery investigation of Alcoa’s dealings with Bahrain’s state-owned manufacturing company Alba, short for Aluminum Bahrain BSC. Here’s the coverage on that development and related stories here and here.

The AP today is reporting that District Judge Quentin Purdy told Dahdaleh he would be granted bail until an appearance at London’s Southwark Crown Court on Jan. 13. He ordered Dahdaleh to post 10 million pounds in security and said he must observe a 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. curfew at his central London home.

Dahdaleh has been known to have friends in high places – he has ties to former President Bill Clinton’s philanthropic foundation, having donated between $1 million and $5 million to the organization, and has ties to U.K. Labour Party officials, according to public records.

Yesterday, some of his powerful friends came through for him, according to the AP. Friends and relatives of the billionaire, including senior executives from Credit Suisse and oil giant BP, also agreed to offer 1.42 million pounds (US$2.3 million) in sureties, the AP said.

Charging papers from the SFO accuse Dahdaleh of offering payments to Sheik Isa bin Ali al-Khalifa, son-in-law of Bahrain’s prime minister. He is also accused of offering payments to Bruce Hall, the former CEO of Alba.

via International Businessman Granted Bail – Law Blog – WSJ.

A new landscape for competition enforcement: new challenges via e-discovery? | Gregory P. Bufithis, Esq. – JDSupra

Almost a month before the adoption of a package of measures improving the system of competition enforcement in Europe, we attended the 15th Annual Competition Conference presented by the International Bar Association Antitrust Committee … and what better place than in Florence, Italy.

The IBA conference is one of those rare settings where you can discuss current developments in merger law and enforcement, the next steps in antitrust litigation, and the challenges posed by the growing internationalisation of cartel investigations.

And the speakers and attendees are the major players in the field. Joaquin Almunia, EU Commission Competition Commissioner, gave the keynote speach with subsequent presenters including U.S. Federal Trade Commissioner Edith Ramirez, Andreas Mundt who is President of the Bundeskartellamt in Bonn, and Sharis Pozen, Acting Assistant Attorney General, U.S. Department of Justice Antitrust Division.

Please see full article below for more information.

via A new landscape for competition enforcement: new challenges via e-discovery? | Gregory P. Bufithis, Esq. – JDSupra.

E-Discovery At Your Office, Not Ours – Mobile Technology Units from Global EDD Group

Today’s electronic discovery industry has been designed around powerful data centers that provide robust processing and hosting capabilities from a centralized location.   While these centers most certainly provide valuable performance and economic advantages,  it is often not possible to simply ship data to the data centers due to cross-border privacy concerns, tight deadlines, trade secrets or lack of budget-friendly resources.

Realizing these concerns, Global EDD Group has developed specialized mobile technology units (“MTU”) that can deploy worldwide with short notice and provide a full range of self-contained electronic discovery services, including:

◊  Data Mapping
◊  Data Collection
◊  Digital Forensics
◊  Data Minimization
◊  Early Data Assessment
◊  Email Analytics & Conversion
◊  Key Term Analysis
◊  Offline Content Review
◊  TIFF/PDF Conversion

 

Global EDD Group has designed the MTU services to not only alleviate these challenges of shipping data, but to do so at competive price points often comparable to using a local vendor.   Typical usage scenario include:

◊  FCPA Investigation
◊  Due Dilgence Matters
◊  Cross-Border Litigation
◊  Remote Client Facilities (regional, national or international)
◊  Data Protection Act Jurisdictions
◊  Trade Secret Security Concerns

 

Law Firms and Corporations interested in learning more about Mobile Technology Units from Global EDD Group should call +1.888.690.DATA (3282) or email info@globaledd.com for additional information. Global EDD Group also provides these services under subcontract to other industry vendors and service providers.

New York State Bar Association Releases Practitioner’s Guide to E-Discovery

To help lawyers and judges navigate the burgeoning and challenging electronic discovery landscape, the New York State Bar Association has issued guidelines for best practices that offer extensive practical advice on e-discovery issues in state and federal courts in New York.

E-discovery is the preparation, preservation, collection, processing, review, and production of evidence in electronic form — including email, texts, social media, the “cloud,” etc. — in response to business, regulatory, or legal requirements.

Presented in a clear and concise manner, the new publication, Guidelines for Best Practices in E-Discovery in New York State and Federal Courts is available free of charge at www.nysba.org/e-discovery.

State Bar President Vincent E. Doyle III of Buffalo (Connors & Vilardo LLP), said, “Whether documents are stored on Facebook, in an iPad, in email, or in the “cloud,” members of the legal profession must understand their legal responsibilities in preserving, collecting and producing the electronically stored information. In a world where e-discovery is fast becoming standard ‘discovery,’ it is imperative that lawyers understand this emerging area of evidence so we can fulfill our obligations to our clients and the courts.

via New York State Bar Association Releases Practitioner’s Guide to E-Discovery.

E-Discovery Technical Standard at Crossroads | law.com

An attempt by the e-discovery industry to standardize how applications share data has gained only modest adoption, and although technical improvements are planned, there are mixed opinions about the project’s long-term prospects.

Version 1.0 of the specification, EDRM-XML, debuted from the Electronic Discovery Reference Model organization in February 2008 after being proposed in March 2007. Load files are a common input/output method for e-discovery data. By replacing proprietary approaches with a version built on openly published code, the data becomes more accessible, officials promised. Future versions could also allow users to customize or expand the blueprint as needed, they said.

Three years and six months later, vendor adoption of the specification, now in version 1.2, is notable on a surface level but less so in real-world use. There are 24 companies listed on the project website as having at least one compliant product, but none actively call for their customers to use EDRM-XML as the primary method of moving data. Most remain content using Concordance and Summation load files. Another 14 companies are listed as participants, although officials acknowledge that participating has the minimum requirement of simply being on a conference call.

“It has not been as widely used as we would like to see. But I think that’s not really that different from what we were anticipating would be the case,” EDRM co-founder and legal technology expert George Socha said, citing industry indifference as the standard’s biggest obstacle. “One barrier to adoption is inertia,” he said, from St. Paul, Minn.

via E-Discovery Technical Standard at Crossroads.

SFL Data Named One of Bay Area’s Top 100 Fastest-Growing Private Companies

SFL Data announced today that it has been selected as one of the “Top 100 Fastest-Growing Private Companies” in the San Francisco Bay Area for 2011 by the San Francisco Business Times. The company was the first to provide a fixed-price electronic discovery managed service to Fortune 500 companies and AmLaw 250 firms. Based on the success of its proprietary e-discovery service model that provides defensible results, reduced costs and greater control, SFL Data demonstrated a 71.3% increase in revenue growth from 2008 to 2010, ranking it 61st out of 100 Bay Area companies.

“What a credit to these outstanding companies that they have shown such noteworthy growth in the years from 2008 to 2010 – years that many companies were thrilled to stay flat,” said SF Business Times Publisher Mary Huss.

Roughly half of the companies are new to this year’s Fast Private List, including SFL Data. The e-discovery managed service provider’s 71.3% growth increase was supported by a 60% increase in staff – from 58 to 93 employees over the three year period.

“The expertise of our technical staff, knowledge of legal industry and dedication to customer service has enabled us to capitalize on the need for more efficient e-discovery. We look forward to our continued growth as more corporations and law firms realize the benefits of having the best e-discovery team without building it themselves,” said SLF Data CEO Christian Lawrence.

via SFL Data Named One of Bay Area’s Top 100 Fastest-Growing Private Companies.

Facebook says 600,000 account logins compromised every day | msnbc.com

Facebook said this week that hackers using stolen username and password credentials try to break into at least 600,000 accounts every day on the mammoth social networking site.

The revelation was buried in a new security announcement issued by the company on Thursday describing the virtues of its new “Trusted Friends” password restoration technique. UK-based computer security firm Sophos first noticed the data.

The Facebook blog entry includes an infographic explaining the success of the network’s efforts to beat back spam, account hijacking, and other ills.  In it, Facebook says that “only 0.06 percent of 1 billion logins per day are compromised.” The site is able to precisely count the number of stolen or otherwise compromised logins because it challenges the would-be hackers with additional authentication questions, such as asking users to identify friends in pictures, said spokesman Barry Schnitt.

“(This means) 600,000 times a day, we stop a bad guy from getting access to an account even though he has guessed, phished, or stolen the login and password of an account,” Schnitt said. “This is something we’re very proud of.”

via Red Tape – Facebook says 600,000 account logins compromised every day.

How Google Was Tripped up by a Bad Search | PCWorld Business Center

In the end it was a search that let Google down.

The company suffered a setback in its patent dispute with Oracle last week when a U.S. judge denied Google’s request to keep an internal Google email out of the case record. The email, written by a Google engineer, could suggest to a jury that Google knew it needed a license to use Sun’s — now Oracle’s — Java technology in Android.

Ironically, considering this is Google, organizer of the world’s information, the email might never have seen the light of day if the search tools used to identify documents covered by attorney-client privilege had done their job, legal experts said.

The incident also shines a light on an area of technology — electronic discovery — that’s creating big challenges for lawyers as more communication moves online. And it helps explain why Hewlett-Packard is willing to spend US$10 billion to buy Autonomy, one of the biggest providers of e-discovery software and services.

The Google incident apparently stems from a mistake by one of the top law firms it hired to fight Oracle’s lawsuit, which accuses Google of patent and copyright infringement in Android. It’s a high-stakes case that could potentially cost Google billions of dollars in damages, and force it to start charging handset makers a license fee for Android.

Like many corporate lawsuits, this one began with a discovery phase. Each party is required to identify all the emails, chat logs and other documents relevant to the case, and produce them for the opposing legal team. Because there are often millions of documents involved, they use software tools to define date ranges, search for keywords and find the material they have to produce.

Communications discussing legal advice with attorneys are protected by attorney-client privilege, meaning they don’t have to be made public. Google argued that its potentially incriminating email fell into this category.

It was written by Google engineer Tim Lindholm last August, a few weeks before Oracle filed suit against Google. At the time, Oracle had threatened to sue Google for billions of dollars, and Lindholm was instructed by Google executives to see what alternatives to Java existed for use in Android, apparently to strengthen their negotiating position.

via How Google Was Tripped up by a Bad Search | PCWorld Business Center.