Sunday, July 12, 2009

Japanese railway workers take 'Smile Scan' test


Keihin Electric Express Railway Co. has introduced a "Smile Scan" system to evaluate the grins of its station staff.

The smile-measuring software has been developed by Kyoto-based precision equipment maker Omron Corp. The device analyzes the facial characteristics of a person, including eye movements, lip curves and wrinkles, and rates a smile on a scale between 0 and 100 percent using a camera and computer.

For those with low scores, advice like "You still look too serious," or "Lift up your mouth corners," will be displayed on the screen.

Some 530 employees of the Tokyo-based railway company will check their smiles with Smile Scan before starting work each day. They will print out and carry around an image of their best smile in an attempt to remember it.

"We aim to improve our services to make our customers smile," says a company official.

Saturday, July 11, 2009

Identity Theft: Be Prepared


Reduce the info available about you in the public domain. Data you provide on the Net lasts forever and can assist someone in assuming your identity or targeting you for a crime. Keep personal info out of business profiles. Where you live, who you know, and what you do with spare time makes you an interesting person but an easy target.

Every time I watch the news, it seems a new frightening event is occurring. Swine flu, economy, identity theft and gun-carrying coworkers weren't things I used to worry about. How do you keep yourself safe in an increasingly chaotic world?

As I frequently tell my clients, I want you to be prepared, not just scared, about events you can't control.

I interviewed a security Relevant Products/Services specialist, Christopher Falkenberg, for tips on workplace safety. He's worked as a secret service agent and lawyer before starting Insite Security.

Falkenberg surprised me by pointing out that our risk for identity theft has gone down. He said the big problem now is identity impersonations. Apparently, Facebook and LinkedIn can be useful but dangerous because they can give the wrong people too much information.

I asked Falkenberg what he would advise readers to do. His hot tips included:

1. Reduce the information available about you in the public domain. Data you provide on the Internet lasts forever and can assist someone in assuming your identity or targeting you for a crime.

2. Keep personal information out of business profiles. Where you live, who you know, and what you do with spare time makes you an interesting person but an easy target.

3. Be wary of calls you get at work. Falkenberg said criminals are masters at pretending to be a close friend of someone they stalk. If in doubt, don't give out information about coworkers.

4. If a caller pressures you to cough up confidential corporate information, be suspicious. Falkenberg said con artists may use bits of information and pressure tactics to get what they want. Check out the identity of callers.

I was surprised to learn there's actually research on who survives a crisis. Turns out that pessimists fare better than optimists. Having a survival mindset means you have to imagine worst- case scenarios. If you're on a plane, have you counted the rows between you and the exit? If you're staying at a hotel, did you pay attention to the exit route? At work, have you asked about whether the organization has a plan for violence, disasters or pandemics?

Falkenberg said the biggest hurdle for people in a catastrophic event is not to freeze or act habitually. Did you know that most people in a plane crash actually slow themselves down by automatically getting their carry-on luggage?

Having more money or visibility actually increases your security risks (some comfort for the rest of us during this economy). Falkenberg recommends that those with higher income or visibility make certain they keep public information about them vague, business oriented and impersonal. He highlighted the need to do thorough background checks on anyone working for you.

[I] frequently point out that we can't avoid adversity but we can learn ways to handle it well. Falkenberg advises that denial is no protection against a crisis.

Go through your worst case scenarios, listen to your gut instincts, and don't ignore information that makes you uncomfortable.

Friday, July 10, 2009

NASA Launches Possible Astronaut Escape Vehicle


NASA successfully tested on Thursday an escape system for astronauts that may be used on the next generation of shuttle spacecraft.

The unpiloted Max Launch Abort System (MLAS) lifted off from a launch facility here just after sunrise and soared about a mile into the atmosphere before a mockup crew capsule separated from its bullet-shaped enclosure and parachuted safely to the ground.

The MLAS is being considered as an alternative means for astronauts to escape should trouble develop during or shortly after launch. It would eliminate the need for an escape launch tower, such as that used during the Apollo program, as well as attitude control engines.



The system is composed of four parts: a bullet-like fairing with four fins, the crew capsule, a motor cage, and "coast skirt" connecting the motor cage to the fairing. Weighing more than 46,000 pounds and more than 33 feet tall, the MLAS would sit atop an Ares I rocket. Should a problem occur during the early moments of launch, the motor of the MLAS would turn on, carrying the crew away from the rocket. The sections will separate and float to safety at the end of parachutes.


MLAS is not expected to replace an escape system already developed for Orion spacecraft, which will replace the space shuttle by 2012 as a means of traveling to the International Space Station and the moon.

--Wallops Island, VA (AHN)

Thursday, July 9, 2009

Robot Teaches Itself to Smile


A robot has taught itself to smile, frown, and make other human facial expressions using machine learning.

To get the incredibly realistic Einstein robot to make facial expressions, researchers used to have to program each of its 31 artificial muscles individually through trial and error. Now, computer scientists from the Machine Perception Laboratory at the University of California, San Diego have used machine learning to enable the robot to learn expressions on its own.

“The robotic approach is the ultimate in helping us understand learning and development,” said social development expert Daniel Messinger at the University of Miami, who was not involved with the Einstein research but collaborates with the group on another project. “There’s so much we can learn by actually trying to make it happen instead of just watching kids try to move their faces — it’s like having a baby as opposed to just watching a baby.”

According to the researchers, who presented the project last month at the 2009 IEEE 8th International Conference on Development and Learning, this is the first time anyone has used machine learning to teach a robot to make realistic facial expressions.

To begin teaching the robot, the researchers stuck Einstein in front of a mirror and instructed the robot to “body babble” by contorting its face into random positions. A video camera connected to facial recognition software gave the robot feedback: When it made a movement that resembled a “real” expression, it received a reward signal.

“It’s an iterative process,” said facial recognition expert Marian Bartlett, a co-author of the study. “It starts out completely random and then gets feedback. Next time the robot picks an expression, there’s a bias towards putting the motors in the right configuration.”

After the robot figured out the relationship between different muscle movements and known facial expressions, it started experimenting with new expressions, such as eyebrow narrowing.

The robot’s expressions are still a bit awkward, but the researchers say they’re working on ways to make them more realistic, as well experimenting with strategies besides “body babbling” that might speed up the learning process. The group says its studious robot may even improve our understanding of how infants and children learn to make facial expressions.

“The idea is to try to understand some of the computational principles behind learning,” Bartlett said. “Here the computational principle is reinforcement learning and active exploration, which may also be behind learning motor movements in an infant.”

The next step is to get the Einstein robot to start socializing. Once the robot can mimic facial expressions in a social context, the researchers plan to use him in an “automatic tutoring” experiment.

“We’re putting facial expressions onto the robot so that he can engage with a pupil in a non-verbal manner and approximate one-on-one human tutoring as much as possible,” Bartlett said. “Studies have shown that human one-on-one tutoring improves learning by as much as two standard deviations — we want to know how can you try to approximate that with robotic tutoring.”

How a Denial-of-Service Attack Works


Investigators are piecing together details about one of the most aggressive computer attacks in recent memory -- a powerful "denial-of-service" assault that overwhelmed computers at U.S. and South Korean government agencies, companies and institutions, in some cases for days.
How does this type of cyber attack work? And how can people make sure their computers are safe?
Here are some questions and answers about the attack.
Q: What is a "denial-of-service" attack?
A: Think about what would happen if you and all your friends called the same restaurant over and over and ordered things you didn't even really want. You'd jam the phone lines and overwhelm the kitchen to the point that it couldn't take any more new orders.
That's what happens to Web sites when criminals hit them with denial-of-service attacks. They're knocked offline by too many junk requests from computers controlled by the attackers.
The bad guys' main weapon in such an attack is "botnets," or networks of "zombie" personal computers they've infected with a virus. The virus lets the criminals remotely control innocent people's machines, which are programmed to contact certain Web sites over and over until that overwhelms the servers that host the sites. The servers become too busy to respond to anything, and the Web site slows or stops working altogether.
It's different from what usually happens when you try to access a Web site. Normally, you just make one request to see the site, and unless there's a crush of traffic from something like a big news event, the servers respond well. Hijacked PCs, on the other hand, are programmed to send way more traffic than a normal user could generate on his or her own.
Q: How often do these attacks happen?
A: People try denial-of-service attacks all the time -- many government and private sites report being hit every day. Often the assaults are unsuccessful, because Web sites have ways of identifying and intercepting malicious traffic. However, sites really want to avoid blocking legitimate Web users, so more often than not, Internet traffic is let through until a problem is spotted.
Denial-of-service attacks are noisy by design, and they intend to make a statement. They're not subtle attempts to infiltrate a Web site's defenses, which can be much more insidious because that gives hackers access to whatever confidential information is stored there.
Often the attacks take a site out for a few hours, before Web site administrators can respond. What made the most recent attack notable is that it was widespread and went on for a while, beginning over the July Fourth holiday weekend and running into this week. It's not yet clear how the attack was able to last that long.

Q: Some organizations appear to have fended off these recent attacks, while other Web sites went down. How can this be?
A: The sites that went down probably were less prepared, because they are less accustomed to being hit or aren't sensitive enough to warrant extra precautions.
Popular Web sites, like e-commerce and banking sites, have a lot of experience dealing with denial-of-service attacks, and they have sophisticated software designed to identify malicious traffic. Often that's done by flagging suspicious traffic flowing into the site, and if there's enough of it, preventing it from ever reaching the site's servers.
Another approach is to flag suspicious individual machines that seem to be behind an attack, and ban any traffic from them from reaching the site.
That can often be difficult, though, because criminals use "proxy" computers to route their traffic, masking the source of the original requests. Proxy computers are often other infected computers that are part of a botnet.
Q: Is there usually evidence of who the culprits were? Or is the nature of the attack such that it leaves few fingerprints?
A: It's usually easier to stop a denial-of-service attack than it is to figure out who's behind it. Simply identifying where the malicious traffic is coming from won't get investigators very far, since the infected PCs that get roped into a botnet are owned by innocent people who don't know their computers are being used for nefarious purposes.
Pat Peterson, a security researcher and fellow at Cisco Systems Inc., says sophisticated attackers have also been adding a more subtle approach to evade detection.
Instead of directing huge amounts of traffic at a target site, they'll make more complicated requests one at a time that eat up more of the site's computing power , like trying to log in using bogus usernames and passwords. If enough of those requests are made, on a site that requires a lot of computing power, the effect can be the same, and the site gets knocked out.
This type of attack is trickier because it doesn't involve the sort of massive traffic surge that would normally tip off network administrators. This advanced tactic wasn't necessarily used in the most recent attacks. In fact there are signs the attacks were relatively amateurish. The programming code appears to have been patched together largely from material that has been circulating in the criminal underground for several years, according to Jose Nazario, manager of security research for Arbor Networks.
Q: If these attacks make use of compromised computers corralled into a "botnet," should I be worried about whether my PC is one of them? What could I do to prevent that or fix it?
A: If your computer is being used in a denial-of-service attack, you're likely to see a significant slowdown, because your processing power is being siphoned for the assault. But there aren't always obvious signs that your computer has been infected.
So the best thing is to focus on prevention, namely by having up-to-date antivirus software. In particular, make sure your antivirus software gets updated over the next few days.
If you're concerned your machine might be infected, it's wise to run an antivirus scan. Many antivirus companies offer a free scan from their Web sites.