Redmond Readers Pick Their Fave Tools of 2007

You voted and the results are in: Find out which products you've chosen as the cream of the crop.

By Lafe Low / SECURITY WATCH

FIREWALL: HARDWARE-BASED
The Cisco Systems PIX series has proved it can consistently evolve and continues to win in this market. It wins here with a 38.8 percent vote. Ease of use, ease of integration and its position as the de facto industry standard were all frequently cited as reasons for choosing Cisco. "Cisco has been in the game a long time and knows what to do when protection is needed," says Bud Moore of the Tracer Corp.
SonicWALL's TZ and Pro series firewalls brought in a 10 percent vote, while Symantec's Velociraptor earned 7.7 percent.

FIREWALL: SOFTWARE-BASED
Microsoft's ISA Server is the clear winner with 22.2 percent of the votes. After ISA Server's dominance as a software firewall, Check Point and Symantec are in a fairly close matchup, earning 15.8 and 14.5 percent, respectively. Check Point, emerging as the ISV Winner, wins points for being easy to remotely manage, says Ralph Hoefelmeyer. McAfee Personal Firewall Plus brought in 8.3 percent.

INTRUSION DETECTION SYSTEM
Cisco Systems' Cisco Secure IDS is a decisive winner with 20.9 percent of the votes. Open source alternative Snort brought in a 13.1 percent vote. BlackICE Pro, from Network ICE, earned 6.8 percent.

INTRUSION PREVENTION SYSTEM
Cisco Systems also takes the IPS category with its Cisco Security Agent bringing in a 15.4 percent vote. Network Associates IntruShield is up next with 7.3 percent. The next spot is a tie between Symantec ManHunt and Internet Security Systems, each earning a 5.1 percent vote.

SMART CARD/BIOMETRIC/TWO-FACTOR AUTHENTICATION SYSTEM
RSA ran away with the votes for Best Smart Card Authentication System with its SecureID earning 35.3 percent. It helps that they've been around for such a long time and have refined the product and developed a solid reputation. "They're a trusted vendor and it's a workable product that limits false positives and false negatives," says independent consultant Chris Apgar. DigitalPersona brought in 3.5 percent and the next place was a 3.2 percent tie between ActivCard Trinity and Griffin Technologies SecuriKey Pro.

SECURE MESSAGING TOOL OR SERVICE (SPAM AND CONTENT FILTERING)
Microsoft Exchange Server takes this category with a 17.6 percent vote. The ISV Winner is Symantec with a 7.8 percent vote. Microsoft Defender (now Forefront) earned 4.7 percent and Barracuda Networks' Spam Firewall brought in 3.8 percent.

ANTI-VIRUS
Symantec also took a commanding lead in the anti-virus category, thanks to its Anti-Virus tool, which earned 33.8 percent of the vote. "It catches virtually all viruses in real-time and requires very little maintenance," says Dan Roach, IT manager with Dunn Engineering Associates. McAfee's GroupShield took 14.9 percent and Trend Micro 11.4 percent.

ANTI-SPYWARE
McAfee takes top honors here with 15.1 percent of the votes, with Trend Micro Anti-Spyware trailing closely behind with a 12.1 share. Webroot places again with a 9.7 percent vote.
* Excerpted from "Star Power: Redmond Best of the Best Readers' Choice Awards 2007," in the April 2007 issue.

Study: Hackers Attack Every 39 Seconds

From eng.umd.edu

Are hackers trying to get into your computer right now? And what are they up to? A Clark School study is one of the first to quantify the near-constant rate of hacker attacks of computers with Internet access—every 39 seconds on average—and the non-secure usernames and passwords we use that give attackers more chance of success.

The study, conducted by Michel Cukier, Clark School assistant professor of mechanical engineering and affiliate of the Clark School's Center for Risk and Reliability and Institute for Systems Research, profiled the behavior of "brute force" hackers, who use simple software-aided techniques to randomly attack large numbers of computers. The researchers discovered which usernames and passwords are tried most often, and what hackers do when they gain access to a computer.

On TV and in film, these kinds of hackers have been portrayed as people with grudges who target specific institutions and manually try to break into their computers. But in reality, Cukier says, "most of these attacks employ automated scripts that indiscriminately seek out thousands of computers at a time, looking for vulnerabilities." "Our data provide quantifiable evidence that attacks are happening all the time to computers with Internet connections," Cukier notes. "The computers in our study were attacked, on average, 2,244 times a day."

Cukier and two of his graduate students, Daniel Ramsbrock and Robin Berthier, set up weak security on four Linux computers with Internet access, then recorded what happened as the individual machines were attacked. They discovered the vast majority of attacks came from relatively unsophisticated hackers using "dictionary scripts," a type of software that runs through lists of common usernames and passwords attempting to break into a computer.

"Root" was the top username guess by dictionary scripts—attempted 12 times as often as the second-place "admin." Successful 'root' access would open the entire computer to the hacker, while 'admin' would grant access to somewhat lesser administrative privileges. Other top usernames in the hackers' scripts were "test," "guest," "info," "adm," "mysql," "user," "administrator" and "oracle." All should be avoided as usernames, Cukier advises. The researchers found the most common password-guessing ploy was to reenter or try variations of the username. Some 43 percent of all password-guessing attempts simply reentered the username. The username followed by "123" was the second most-tried choice. Other common passwords attempted included "123456," "password," "1234," "12345," "passwd," "123," "test," and "1." These findings support the warnings of security experts that a password should never be identical or even related to its associated username, Cukier says.

Once hackers gain access to a computer, they swiftly act to determine whether it could be of use to them. During the study, the hackers' most common sequence of actions was to check the accessed computer's software configuration, change the password, check the hardware and/or software configuration again, download a file, install the downloaded program, and then run it. What are the hackers trying to accomplish? "The scripts return a list of 'most likely prospect' computers to the hacker, who then attempts to access and compromise as many as possible," Cukier says. "Often they set up 'back doors' — undetected entrances into the computer that they control — so they can create 'botnets,' for profit or disreputable purposes." A botnet is a collection of compromised computers that are controlled by autonomous software robots answering to a hacker who manipulates the computers remotely. Botnets can act to perpetrate fraud or identity theft, disrupt other networks, and damage computer files, among other things.

This study provides solid statistical evidence that supports widely held beliefs about username/password vulnerability and post-compromise attacking behavior. Computer users should avoid all of the usernames and passwords identified in the research and choose longer, more difficult and less obvious passwords with combinations of upper and lowercase letters and numbers that are not open to brute-force dictionary attacks.

HPV - 'Tell Someone'? We Tried!

Yes, HPV causes cervical cancer. Why did people scoff eight years ago, when we wanted to warn them?

By Gina R. Dalfonzo

You've probably seen the commercials. Over the last few months, it's been almost impossible not to see them. They parade endlessly across our screens—a multitude of women of all ages, from all backgrounds—and they all have the same urgent message to share: "Tell someone that human papillomavirus causes cervical cancer. Tell someone. Tell someone. Tell someone."
To which I can only respond, "We tried." Lest you think me odd for talking to the television, let me add that I usually only do it in moments of extreme frustration. And the "Tell Someone" ads frustrate me because, for years now, friends and colleagues of mine have been trying to "tell someone," anyone, about the HPV-cervical cancer link. But no one wanted to listen.
Someone told me about HPV a few years ago when I was working at Family Research Council (FRC), a Christian public policy group in Washington, D.C. Friends and co-workers of mine there were lobbying for the addition of a warning about HPV to condom packages. Specifically, they wanted to warn people about the HPV-cancer link and the fact that condoms could not protect women against this dangerous virus.
All the way back at the turn of this century, FRC staffers Heather Farish (now Heather Cirmo) and Yvette Cantu (now Yvette Schneider) wrote in a thoroughly researched policy paper:

"HPV has been linked to over 90 percent of all invasive cervical cancers, and is the number two cause of cancer deaths among women, after breast cancer. Approximately 16,000 new cases of cervical cancer are diagnosed each year, and 5,000 women die annually from this disease."

To back up their statistics, they cited such prestigious sources as The New England Journal of Medicine and the Kaiser Family Foundation. In short, just as the commercials tell us to do, they told someone. And they were told to shut up.
A chorus of voices from the media, politicians, and organizations like and the Planned Parenthood and the Sexuality Information and Education Council of the U.S. (SIECUS) derailed the condom-labeling effort, claiming that FRC and its allies were putting teenagers and young adults in danger by making condoms look bad. "What no one in the HPV brigade mentions," scoffed Sharon Lerner in the Village Voice in 1999, "is that, even by conservative estimates, a teeny number of people who have the virus—far less than 1 percent—will develop cervical cancer." The implication was that it was hardly worth putting warnings on condoms for that minuscule number of women.
How strange, then, that just eight years later—with the same amount of information about the link between HPV and cancer, and fewer infections and deaths than we had then—the calls to vaccinate that "teeny number" of women and girls are loud and urgent. Suddenly, the situation is dire enough that governors and legislatures in more than 20 states have either ordered mandatory HPV vaccinations, or are attempting to do so.
Of course, these recent efforts hit a snag when it came out that at least some of the lawmakers had accepted donations from Merck, the drug company that manufactures the vaccinations and came up with the ubiquitous "Tell Someone" campaign. But the call for mandatory vaccinations is still ongoing—and, believe it or not, coming from the same people who used to say that HPV was no big deal and that we really needed to lower our voices. Having turned 180 degrees in how they view the urgency of the disease, these former critics could have joined with people who had already been spreading the message for years. Instead, they attacked them.
In an article in The Nation titled "Virginity or Death!" (I'm not kidding), written when the vaccine first came out, Katha Pollitt accused Christian conservatives of wanting high HPV infection rates to undermine the case for condoms and to "try to scare kids away from sex." "With HPV potentially eliminated, the antisex brigade will lose a card it has regarded as a trump unless it can persuade parents that vaccinating their daughters will turn them into tramps, and that sex today is worse than cancer tomorrow," she wrote. "What is it with these right-wing Christians? Faced with a choice between sex and death, they choose death every time. … As they flex their political muscle, right-wing Christians increasingly reveal their condescending view of women as moral children who need to be kept in line sexually by fear." Pollitt's rage was triggered by a quotation from Bridget Maher, who was then working for FRC (she's now at the Department of Health and Human Services). Maher had told the New Scientist, "Giving the HPV vaccine to young women could be potentially harmful because they may see it as a license to engage in premarital sex." As Maher would later tell me, "FRC was never against the vaccine and never said they would oppose FDA approval." This is consistent with the statement on FRC's website about the vaccine. "We merely expressed some concerns about it."
Feminists could be expected to have similar concerns over lawmakers taking money from drug companies to force a brand-new vaccine on young girls. But many are apparently too busy being angry at the people who had expressed any concerns: Christians. At this point, it's tempting just to retreat with a pout and a grumpy "They hate us no matter WHAT we say, so why bother?" We'd certainly have a point. But we can't just leave it there. Instead, we need to learn something from the bitter ironies on display here: namely, that our society will gravitate toward any message that endorses sexuality unencumbered by biblical morality. If "telling someone," as the ad campaign urges, means that they'll be advocating safe sex, all well and good. But if the cause of free sex is better served by keeping silent, the message becomes, "Tell no one." Not even if it might put her health at risk. The urge for absolute sexual autonomy and freedom from any kind of control is that powerful—and that deadly.
That's precisely why we cannot retreat when the physical and spiritual health of those around us is at stake. Our goal should always be to "tell someone" where destructive behavior can lead—whether telling someone happens to be fashionable at the moment or not.

UPDATE 4/25/07: I just ran across an informative article on HPV. It can be accessed on WebMD. The article is well worth the read.

Study: Chinese Restaurant Food Is Unhealthy

The typical Chinese restaurant menu is a sea of nutritional no-nos, a consumer group has found.

Source: FOXNews.com

A plate of General Tso's chicken, for example, is loaded with about 40 percent more sodium and more than half the calories an average adult needs for an entire day. The battered, fried chicken dish with vegetables has 1,300 calories, 3,200 milligrams of sodium and 11 grams of saturated fat. That's before the rice (200 calories a cup). And after the egg rolls (200 calories and 400 milligrams of sodium).
"I don't want to put all the blame on Chinese food," said Bonnie Liebman, nutrition director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest, which did a report released Tuesday. "Across the board, American restaurants need to cut back on calories and salt, and in the meantime, people should think of each meal as not one, but two, and bring home half for tomorrow," Liebman said.
The average adult needs around 2,000 calories a day and 2,300 milligrams of salt, which is about one teaspoon of salt, according to government guidelines. In some ways, Liebman said, Italian and Mexican restaurants are worse for your health, because their food is higher in saturated fat, which can increase the risk of heart disease. While Chinese restaurant food is bad for your waistline and blood pressure — sodium contributes to hypertension — it does offer vegetable-rich dishes and the kind of fat that's not bad for the heart. However — and this is a big however — the veggies aren't off the hook. A plate of stir-fried greens has 900 calories and 2,200 milligrams of sodium. And eggplant in garlic sauce has 1,000 calories and 2,000 milligrams of sodium.
"We were shocked. We assumed the vegetables were all low in calories," Liebman said. Also surprising were some appetizers: An order of six steamed pork dumplings has 500 calories, and there's not much difference, about 10 calories per dumpling, if they're pan-fried. The group found that not much has changed since it examined Chinese food 15 years ago. That's not all bad, Liebman said. "We were glad not to find anything different," she said. "Some restaurant food has gotten a lot worse. Companies seem to pile on. Instead of just cheesecake, you get coconut chocolate chip cheesecake with a layer of chocolate cake, and lasagna with meatballs."
The group says there is no safe harbor from sodium on the Chinese restaurant menu, but it offers several tips for making a meal healthier:

• Look for dishes that feature vegetables instead of meat or noodles. Ask for extra broccoli, snow peas or other veggies.
• Steer clear of deep-fried meat, seafood or tofu. Order it stir-fried or braised.
• Hold the sauce, and eat with a fork or chopsticks to leave more sauce behind.
• Avoid salt, which means steering clear of the duck sauce, hot mustard, hoisin sauce and soy sauce.
• Share your meal or take half home for later.
• Ask for brown rice instead of white rice.

Technology History

Scottish inventor Alexander Bain invented the facsimile process in 1843. He devised an apparatus comprised of two pens connected to two pendulums, which in turn were joined to a wire that was able to reproduce writing on an electrically conductive surface. He received a British patent for “improvements in producing and regulating electric currents and improvements in timepieces and in electric printing and signal telegraphs.”

The Race to 100 MPG

CNN article by Billy Baker / Popular Science

Over the past several decades, the promise of the "car of tomorrow" has remained unfulfilled, while the problems it was supposed to solve have only intensified.
The average price of a gallon of gas is higher than at any time since the early 1980s. The Middle East seems more volatile than ever. And even climate skeptics are starting to admit that the carbon we're pumping into the atmosphere might have disastrous consequences. To these circumstances, automakers have responded with a fleet of cars that averages 21 miles per gallon, about 4 mpg worse than the Model T. Yet hope is coming faster than that hydrogen economy you've been hearing about. Several small companies are developing new engine technologies and advanced automotive designs that promise to deliver 100 miles from a single gallon of gas. The proposals run from the simple -- reduce weight, improve aerodynamics -- to the incredible (one company wants to borrow a few tricks from jet engines).
The race should heat up further when the X Prize Foundation -- the group that kick-started the space-tourism industry with its $10 million competition to produce a reusable private spacecraft -- announces in the next few months a competition for the first car to break 100 mpg and sell a yet-to-be-decided number of units. The prize money hadn't been finalized at press time, but X Prize officials are discussing figures in the $25 million range as an appropriate incentive. They hope the prize will urge people to completely reconsider what a car should look like and how it should function. "We need a paradigm shift," says Mark Goodstein, the executive director for the automotive X Prize. "We need to change the way people think about automobiles."
Here are three technologies that auto-industry insiders we consulted think could raise the bar for automotive fuel economy -- and quite possibly secure the X Prize's huge purse.

Smaller, better, cheaper
By far the most obvious approach to achieving ultra-high mileage is to dramatically cut weight and wind resistance, the chief enemies of highway mileage. This is the gambit you see in student engineering competitions, in which teardrop-shaped microvehicles on bicycle wheels regularly achieve hundreds of miles to the gallon. But these vehicles are all expensive prototypes. The challenge is to make a light, highly aerodynamic vehicle that's reliable, crash-worthy and, most important, inexpensive to mass-produce.
Steve Fambro may have tinkered his way into the solution. His Aptera, which he designed in his garage in Carlsbad, California, is a three-wheeled, bullet-shaped two-seater that minimizes drag and weighs only 850 pounds (the Toyota Prius weighs 2,890 pounds). He cut bulk by using a carbon composite frame, a race-inspired solution that should help with crash absorption. Fambro's company, Accelerated Composites, is drawing the attention of several venture capitalists, and he hopes to have the Aptera on the market in less than two years. "Everything I had been doing was with an eye toward manufacturability," he says. By using novel composite-construction techniques, including inexpensive molds and automated fabrication processes, Fambro says he can keep the cost per vehicle under $20,000. And when combined with a hybrid engine that burns diesel, the Aptera could break 300 mpg. [As made now, the Aptera achieves 230 mpg.]

Hybrids without batteries
The hybrid drivetrain has been the great success story of the high-mileage movement. Cars like the Prius get up to twice the mileage of the industry average partially by recovering energy that's lost as heat during braking, storing that energy in a battery, and reusing it later on. Yet today's most efficient hybrids can recover only 30 percent of that energy for reuse. One radical solution under development at the Environmental Protection Agency's Advanced Technology Division is to get rid of the heavy batteries altogether.
The EPA has built a modified hybrid that uses a hydraulic system, not a battery, to store braking energy. When you press the brakes, the wheels drive a pump that compresses nitrogen gas, which is inexpensive and inert. When you accelerate again, that compressed gas runs the pump in reverse to help power the vehicle. The hydraulic-hybrid system, scheduled to begin testing in two UPS trucks this month, with another to follow next year, promises to return at least 70 percent of the braking energy back to the wheels, which would lead to a 60 to 70 percent jump in fuel economy and a 40 percent reduction in emissions. Perhaps that's why Charles Gray, the director of the Advanced Technology Division and one of the developers of the hydraulic hybrid, can't contain his excitement about its potential. "This is going to be the biggest revolution in automotive history," he declares. "Bigger than the assembly line." That's yet to be seen, of course, but the hydraulic hybrid is also smaller and cheaper than conventional hybrids.
"I can hold a 500-horsepower hydraulic pump motor in my hand, and I'm not a big guy," Gray says. Because the technology would eliminate the need for a transmission -- the engine merely pressurizes the hydraulic system, while the hydraulic motors power the wheels -- and several other parts, it could be installed in a small car for almost no additional cost. Ford, the U.S. Army and others are investigating the technology, yet UPS -- with its fleet of vehicles that constantly suffer through stop-and-go driving -- is its only committed customer so far.

Jet-engine inspiration
Another potential player in the race to 100 mpg is the StarRotor, which began life as an air conditioner at Texas A&M University. Chemical-engineering professor Mark Holtzapple and his colleague Andrew Rabroker were attempting to build a better compressor for an air conditioner when they hit on the idea that became the StarRotor engine's basic architecture. Once they made the connection to car engines, "we quickly forgot about air conditioners," Rabroker says. They have since formed a business (also called StarRotor) to commercialize the technology.
The StarRotor uses the same thermodynamic process as jet engines to recuperate some of the heat normally lost to exhaust, something that the design of a piston engine doesn't allow. The exhaust heat warms the air that comes into the engine before the fuel is added. This hot air leads to more powerful combustion, which means the StarRotor can extract more energy from a given amount of fuel than a conventional engine could. Based on data from compressor prototypes, Rabroker believes the StarRotor will convert between 45 and 65 percent of the chemical energy in its fuel to mechanical energy, irrespective of the engine's operating speed or power. In contrast, a typical gasoline engine has a peak efficiency of about 30 percent at full throttle and operates at a much lower efficiency during typical driving conditions. "Double is a gimme," Rabroker says of the StarRotor's potential. "I think we can ultimately triple the fuel mileage."
Double or triple, though, what's important is that innovators are developing solutions to our oil predicament -- solutions that could have a huge influence before the first hydrogen-powered car ever leaves the lot.

Study: 'Christian' Movies Earn More than those with Sex, Obscenities

Source: ChristianToday

A recent study that looked at top box office movies from 1998 through 2006 has found that films with a strong Christian worldview tend to perform better at the theatres than those that include explicit sex and nudity and/or extreme foul language.
The study, which is a dissection of a larger 120-page report that spans nine years, was written up by Dr. Ted Baehr, publisher of MovieGuide - a Christian movie review publication that attempts to alert parents of movie subject matter. It shows that “Christian” films – films with a strong Christian worldview – make anywhere from two to seven times more in ticket sales than those with explicit sex and nudity. The findings are far different than the “sex sells” formula that has been a cliché trademark of American advertising, which uses it to legitimise media’s use of mature content.
“Hollywood pundits and advertisers on Madison Avenue like to tell the press that sex, nudity and obscenity sells best,” expressed Baehr in the report, “but nothing could be further from the truth.” According to the study, the highest and lowest averages for films with a strong Christian worldview were between $106.3 million per movie and $30.1 million per movie, respectively. Those films that have strong profanity, sex, and/or nudity had a range of high-lows from $27.7 million per movie to $6.3 million per movie, respectively. “Thus, the vast majority of moviegoers...prefer positive Christian movies with morally uplifting content,” said Baehr in the write-up. He added, “If Hollywood executives and filmmakers want to make more money at the box office, they should make more movies that reflect a very strong Christian worldview with very strong moral values.”
The study also lists a detailed account for the box office average for each of the nine examined years for those movies with strong Christian worldview values and those with explicit sex, nudity, and foul language.

R.I.P. to Rap - It's Time for New Ideas in Music

There is more evidence that the degrading and violent rhetoric of hip-hop (aka rap) is dying a quiet death. An on-going (unscientific) poll taken by GasBuddy.com shows that only 3% (~225) of the nearly 7,500 respondents listen to hip-hop while driving in their cars. The music category with the highest percentage (33%) was rock and/or pop music. News, sports, talk came in second, with 26% of the vote.
These are interesting statistics, especially in light of recent articles showing that hip-hop is on the decline. Personally, I'm glad to see it (or should that be hear it). The violence, filthy language and overt sexual lyrics/videos of hip-hop have made it a bane to the ears of parents for years.
Listen, I love music. It has been a major source of entertainment, comfort and even inspiration throughout my entire life. I like many kinds of music. However, I cannot stand to hear most of the rap music produced. I find celebrations of violence, vulgar language and degradation of women into "bee-aaches" and "ho's" to be used for sex (willingly or otherwise) to be extremely offensive. There's simply no need for these messages in music -- any more than there was for the messages in "death metal" of the 1990s.
R.I.P. to rap. May it rest in peace and its potty-mouthed purveyors... may they learn to respect themselves and others.

What do you usually listen to while driving? (Discuss)
Rock / Pop		33%
R&B / Rap / Hip Hop		3%
Country / Western		12%
Jazz		2%
News / Sports / Talk		26%
My passengers		1%
Other		14%
Nothing		5%
Total votes: 7484

Courtesy: GasBuddy.com

Rock-n-Roll Hall of Fame: Definitive 200 Albums (Part 2)

The Rock-n-Roll Hall of Fame has just published it's Definitive 200 albums of all time. Yesterday, I posted the first 100 album artists and titles.
Again, some of the choices are obviously good ones. Others, like Dixie Chicks, Tool, Jay-Z and Outkast are questionable (to put it politely). I jokingly said that I suspect some of the HoF staff is on crack yesterday. Of course, that wasn't a serious comment -- though it could be a fair assumption when reading some of the choices -- along with being tone deaf AND not knowing talent from non-talent.
Anyway, here is the remainder of the list -- numbers 101 - 200 (renumbered by my software, dangit).

1. TOM PETTY – FULL MOON FEVER – 1989
2. VAN HALEN – 1984 – 1984
3. SOUNDTRACK – TITANIC – 1997
4. CROSBY STILLS & NASH – DÉJÀ VU – 1970
5. TLC – CRAZYSEXYCOOL – 1999
6. BECK – ODELAY – 1994
7. KENNY G – BREATHLESS – 1992
8. NWA. – STRAIGHT OUTTA COMPTON – 1989
9. SEX PISTOLS – NEVER MIND THE BOLLOCKS – 1977
10. BEATLES – RUBBER SOUL – 1965
11. RADIOHEAD – O.K. COMPUTER – 1997
12. SIMON & GARFUNKEL – BRIDGE OVER TROUBLE WATER – 1970
13. DIXIE CHICKS – FLY – 1999
14. METALLICA – AND JUSTICE FOR ALL – 1988
15. MICHAEL JACKSON – DANGEROUS – 1991
16. MARIAH CAREY – DAYDREAM – 1995
17. SOUNDTRACK – TOP GUN – 1999
18. ELTON JOHN – GOODBYE YELLOW BRICK ROAD – 1973
19. POLICE – SYNCHRONICITY – 1983
20. NO DOUBT – TRAGIC KINGDOM – 1995
21. ROLLING STONES – BEGGAR’S BANQUET – 1968
22. R KELLY – R – 1998
23. TOOL – LATERALUS – 2001
24. OASIS – WHAT’S THE STORY MORNING GLORY – 1995
25. BOB MARLEY – EXODUS – 1977
26. JOURNEY – ESCAPE – 1981
27. CHRISTINA AGUILERA – CHRISTINA AGUILERA – 1999
28. JAY-Z – BLUEPRINT – 2001
29. ALICIA KEYS – DIARY OF ALICIA KEYS – 2003
30. SOUNDTRACK – O BROTHER WHERE ART THOU? – 2000
31. CARS – CARS – 1978
32. ENYA – DAY WITHOUT RAIN – 2000
33. NATALIE COLE – UNFORGETTABLE WITH LOVE NATALIE COLE – 1991
34. SOUNDTRACK – FOOTLOOSE – 1984
35. LIONEL RICHIE – CAN’T SLOW DOWN – 1983
36. SARAH MCLACHLAN – SURFACING – 1997
37. BONNIE RAITT – NICK OF TIME – 1989
38. METALLICA – RIDE THE LIGHTNING – 1984
39. SHERYL CROW – TUESDAY NIGHT MUSIC CLUB – 1993
40. FRANK SINATRA – IN THE WEE SMALL HOURS – 1954
41. EARTH WIND FIRE – GRATITUDE – 1975
42. ZZ TOP – ELIMINATOR – 1983
43. WILLIE NELSON – RED HEADED STRANGER – 1975
44. JOHN LENNON – IMAGINE – 1971
45. TONI BRAXTON – TONI BRAXTON – 1993
46. ETTA JAMES – AT LAST – 1961
47. ELVIS PRESLEY – ELVIS PRESLEY – 1956
48. CAT STEVENS – TEA FOR THE TILLERMAN – 1970
49. SMASHING PUMPKINS – MELLON COLLIE & THE INFINITE SADNESS – 1995
50. DAVE BRUBECK – TIME OUT – 1959
51. JANET JACKSON – JANET – 1993
52. QUEEN – A NIGHT AT THE OPERA – 1975
53. OZZY OSBOURNE – BLIZZARD OF OZZ –1980
54. WILL SMITH – BIG WILLIE STYLE – 1997
55. PRINCE – SIGN OF THE TIMES – 1987
56. PUBLIC ENEMY – IT TAKES A NATION OF MILLIONS TO HOLD US BACK – 1988
57. BOB DYLAN – BLOOD ON THE TRACKS – 1975
58. GEORGE MICHAEL - FAITH – 1987
59. BOYZ II MEN – COOLEYHIGHHARMONY – 1993
60. DESTINY’S CHILD – WRITING’S ON THE WALL – 1999
61. JAY-Z – BLACK ALBUM – 2003
62. AVRIL LAVIGNE – LET GO – 2002
63. FUGEES – SCORE – 1996
64. MADONNA – LIKE A VIRGIN – 1984
65. LED ZEPPELIN – LED ZEPPELIN – 1969
66. STEVIE RAY VAUGHN – TEXAS FLOOD – 1983
67. STONE TEMPLE PILOTS – CORE – 1992
68. ORIGINAL CAST – PHANTOM OF THE OPERA HIGHLIGHTS – 1988
69. JETHRO TULL – AQUALUNG – 1971
70. TUPAC – ME AGAINST THE WORLD – 1995
71. DAVID BOWIE – RISE AND FALL OF ZIGGY STARDUST – 1972
72. SHAKIRA – LAUNDRY SERVICE – 2002
73. SOUNDTRACK – FORREST GUMP – 2001
74. AL GREEN – CALL ME – 1973
75. CURTIS MAYFIELD – SUPERFLY – 1997
76. LIVE – THROWING COPPER – 1994
77. GEORGE BENSON – BREEZIN’ – 1976
78. WHITE STRIPES – WHITE BLOOD CELLS – 2001
79. LYNYRD SKYNYRD – PRONOUNCED LEH-NERD SKIN-ERD – 1973
80. SADE – DIAMOND LIFE – 1984
81. FLEETWOOD MAC – FLEETWOOD MAC – 1975
82. PAUL MCCARTNEY & WINGS – BAND ON THE RUN – 1973
83. BEYONCE – DANGEROUSLY IN LOVE – 2003
84. ANITA BAKER – RAPTURE – 1986
85. NAS – IIIMATIC – 1994
86. BARBARA STREISAND – A STAR IS BORN – 1976
87. EARTH WIND FIRE – THAT’S THE WAY OF THE WORLD – 1975
88. ANITA BAKER – RHYTHM OF LOVE – 1994
89. JAY-Z – IN MY LIFETIME VOL 1 – 1997
90. LL COOL J – MAMA SAID KNOCK YOU OUT – 1990
91. STEELY DAN – AJA – 1977
92. WILLIE NELSON – STARDUST – 1978
93. ARETHA FRANKLIN – SPARKLE – 1976
94. ANDREA BOCELLI – ANDREA – 2004
95. BOB DYLAN – BRINGING IT ALL BACK HOME – 1965
96. LUTHER VANDROSS – NEVER TOO MUCH – 1981
97. U2 – ALL THAT YOU CAN’T LEAVE BEHIND – 2000
98. RUSH – 2112 – 1976
99. OUTKAST – AQUEMINI – 1998
100. GRAND FUNK RAILROAD – WE’RE AN AMERICAN BAND – 1973

Rock-n-Roll Hall of Fame: Definitive 200 Albums (Part 1)

The Rock-n-Roll Hall of Fame has just published it's Definitive 200 -- a list of the must-have, awe-inspiring, head-banging, juke-jivin', whinin' & cryin', toe-tappin' best albums of all time. The Top 100 albums are listed below. Just for kicks, the albums in bold are some of my favorites -- though not in the Hall's order.
I personally would move Boston's first album, along with Aerosmith's Toys in the Attic and Dire Straits' Brothers in Arms (among others) higher on the list. How that no-talent punk Eminem made it into the top FIVE-hundred, I'll never understand. Some of the folks at the HoF must be hard of hearing AND on crack. Wait! Celine Dion, Kid Rock and Dixie Chicks? Now, I know some of the Rock HoFamers are on crack. Jeez, Louise!

Anyway, I'll post the remaining definitive 100 tomorrow...

1. BEATLES – SGT. PEPPER’S LONELY HEARTS CLUB BAND – 1967
2. PINK FLOYD – DARK SIDE OF THE MOON – 1973
3. MICHAEL JACKSON – THRILLER – 1982
4. LED ZEPPELIN – LED ZEPPELIN IV – 1971
5. U2 – JOSHUA TREE –1987
6. ROLLING STONES – EXILE ON MAIN STREET – 1972
7. CAROLE KING – TAPESTRY – 1971
8. BOB DYLAN – HIGHWAY ‘61 REVISITED – 1965
9. BEACH BOYS – PET SOUNDS – 1966
10. NIRVANA – NEVERMIND – 1991
11. PEARL JAM – TEN – 1991
12. BEATLES – ABBEY ROAD – 1969
13. SANTANA – SUPERNATURAL – 1999
14. METALLICA – METALLICA – 1991
15. BRUCE SPRINGSTEEN – BORN TO RUN – 1975
16. PRINCE – PURPLE RAIN – 1984
17. AC/DC – BACK IN BLACK – 1980
18. ROLLING STONES – LET IT BLEED – 1969
19. DOORS – DOORS – 1967
20. GRATEFUL DEAD – AMERICAN BEAUTY – 1970
21. SHANIA TWAIN – COME ON OVER – 1997
22. WHO – WHO’S NEXT – 1971
23. STEVIE WONDER – SONGS IN THE KEY OF LIFE – 1976
24. FLEETWOOD MAC – RUMOURS – 1977
25. PINK FLOYD – [THE] WALL – 1979
26. ALANIS MORISSETTE – JAGGED LITTLE PILL – 1995
27. NORAH JONES – COME AWAY WITH ME – 2002
28. EMINEM – MARSHALL MATHERS LP – 2000
29. OUTKAST – SPEAKERBOXX-LOVE BELOW – 2003
30. DR. DRE – CHRONIC – 1992
31. BEASTIE BOYS – LICENSED TO ILL – 1986
32. GUNS ‘N ROSES –APPETITE FOR DESTRUCTION – 1987
33. DIXIE CHICKS – WIDE OPEN SPACES – 1998
34. MILES DAVIS – KIND OF BLUE – 1959
35. EAGLES – HOTEL CALIFORNIA – 1976
36. DEF LEPPARD – HYSTERIA – 1987
37. SOUNDTRACK – GREASE – 1980
38. MARVIN GAYE – WHAT’S GOING ON – 1978
39. BEATLES – WHITE ALBUM – 1968
40. SOUNDTRACK – SATURDAY NIGHT FEVER – 1977
41. JIMI HENDRIX – ARE YOU EXPERIENCED? – 1967
42. BEATLES – REVOLVER – 1966
43. BOSTON – BOSTON – 1976
44. BON JOVI – SLIPPERY WHEN WET – 1986
45. U2 – ACHTUNG BABY – 1991
46. WHITNEY HOUSTON – WHITNEY HOUSTON – 1985
47. LED ZEPPELIN – LED ZEPPELIN II – 1969
48. DAVE MATTHEWS BAND – CRASH – 1996
49. ROLLING STONES – STICKY FINGERS – 1971
50. GREEN DAY – DOOKIE – 1994
51. LED ZEPPELIN – HOUSES OF THE HOLY –1973
52. JONI MITCHELL – BLUE – 1971
53. ELVIS PRESLEY – ELVIS AT SUN – 2004
54. AEROSMITH – TOYS IN THE ATTIC – 1975
55. LAURYN HILL – MISEDUCATION OF LAURYN HILL – 1998
56. BRUCE SPRINGSTEEN – BORN IN THE U.S.A. – 1984
57. 50 CENT – GET RICH OR DIE TRYIN’ – 2003
58. AC/DC – HIGHWAY TO HELL – 1979
59. NOTORIOUS B.I.G. – LIFE AFTER DEATH – 1997
60. VAN HALEN – VAN HALEN – 1978
61. GREEN DAY – AMERICAN IDIOT – 2004
62. BLACK SABBATH – PARANOID – 1971
63. EMINEM – EMINEM SHOW – 2000
64. JEWEL – PIECES OF YOU – 1995
65. COLDPLAY – RUSH OF BLOOD TO THE HEAD – 2002
66. MEATLOAF – BAT OUT OF HELL – 1977
67. USHER – CONFESSIONS – 2004
68. KID ROCK – DEVIL WITHOUT A CAUSE – 1998
69. GEORGE HARRISON – ALL THINGS MUST PASS – 1970
70. BILLY JOEL – STRANGER – 1977
71. EAGLES – HELL FREEZES OVER – 1994
72. VAN MORRISON – MOONDANCE – 1970
73. REM – AUTOMATIC FOR THE PEOPLE – 1992
74. PHIL COLLINS – NO JACKET REQUIRED – 1985
75. METALLICA – MASTER OF PUPPETS – 1986
76. FAITH HILL – BREATHE – 1999
77. JOHNNY CASH – AT FOLSOM PRISON – 1968
78. JOHN COLTRANE – LOVE SUPREME – 1964
79. PINK FLOYD – WISH YOU WERE HERE – 1975
80. MICHAEL JACKSON – OFF THE WALL – 1979
81. MARVIN GAYE – LET’S GET IT ON – 1973
82. BOB SEGER – NIGHT MOVES – 1976
83. PAUL SIMON – GRACELAND – 1986
84. LINKIN PARK – HYBRID THEORY – 2000
85. PRINCE – 1999 – 1983
86. DEF LEPPARD – PYROMANIA – 1983
87. JANET JACKSON – CONTROL – 1986
88. RED HOT CHILI PEPPERS – BLOOD SUGAR SEX MAGIK – 1991
89. DIRE STRAITS – BROTHERS IN ARMS – 1985
90. TUPAC – ALL EYEZ ON ME – 1996
91. MATCHBOX TWENTY – YOURSELF OR SOMEONE LIKE YOU – 1996
92. RED HOT CHILI PEPPERS – CALIFORNICATION – 1999
93. LED ZEPPELIN – PHYSICAL GRAFFITI – 1975
94. NELLY – COUNTRY GRAMMAR – 2000
95. CREED – HUMAN CLAY – 1999
96. CLASH – LONDON CALLING – 1979
97. CELINE DION – FALLING INTO YOU – 1996
98. NEIL YOUNG – HARVEST – 1972
99. SOUNDTRACK – DIRTY DANCING – 1987
100. DIXIE CHICKS – HOME – 2002

Technology History: Michelangelo

The Michelangelo virus was the first computer virus to capture the attention of the mass media. Set to execute on March 6, 1992 (the birth day of the famous Renaissance artist of the same name), the virus was predicted to destroy data on all personal computers on which it was loaded. The hype lead to many first-time installations of anti-virus software and other computer checks. All told, less than 10,000 PCs worldwide were affected as a result of the Michelangelo virus.
The good news is that consumers woke up to the fact that hackers were out there trying to damage their systems.

Sales of Rap Albums Take Stunning Nosedive

Source: FOXNews.com

Maybe it was the umpteenth coke-dealing anthem or soft-porn music video. Perhaps it was the preening antics that some call reminiscent of Stepin Fetchit. The turning point is hard to pinpoint. But after 30 years of growing popularity, rap music is now struggling with an alarming sales decline and growing criticism from within about the culture's negative effect on society.
Rap insider Chuck Creekmur, who runs the leading Web site Allhiphop.com, says he got a message from a friend recently "asking me to hook her up with some Red Hot Chili Peppers because she said she's through with rap. A lot of people are sick of rap ... the negativity is just over the top now."
The rapper Nas, considered one of the greats, challenged the condition of the art form when he titled his latest album "Hip-Hop is Dead." It's at least ailing, according to recent statistics: Though music sales are down overall, rap sales slid a whopping 21 percent from 2005 to 2006, and for the first time in 12 years no rap album was among the top 10 sellers of the year. A recent study by the Black Youth Project showed a majority of youth think rap has too many violent images. In a poll of black Americans by The Associated Press and AOL-Black Voices last year, 50 percent of respondents said hip-hop was a negative force in American society.
Nicole Duncan-Smith grew up on rap, worked in the rap industry for years and is married to a hip-hop producer. She still listens to rap, but says it no longer speaks to or for her. She wrote the children's book "I Am Hip-Hop" partly to create something positive about rap for young children, including her 4-year-old daughter. "I'm not removed from it, but I can't really tell the difference between Young Jeezy and Yung Joc. It's the same dumb stuff to me," says Duncan-Smith, 33. "I can't listen to that nonsense ... I can't listen to another black man talk about you don't come to the 'hood anymore and ghetto revivals ... I'm from the 'hood. How can you tell me you want to revive it? How about you want to change it? Rejuvenate it?"
Hip-hop also seems to be increasingly blamed for a variety of social ills. Studies have attempted to link it to everything from teen drug use to increased sexual activity among young girls. Even the mayhem that broke out in Las Vegas during last week's NBA All-Star Game was blamed on hip-hoppers. "(NBA Commissioner) David Stern seriously needs to consider moving the event out of the country for the next couple of years in hopes that young, hip-hop hoodlums would find another event to terrorize," columnist Jason Whitlock, who is black, wrote on AOL.
While rap has been in essence pop music for years, and most rap consumers are white, some worry that the black community is suffering from hip-hop — from the way America perceives blacks to the attitudes and images being adopted by black youth. But the rapper David Banner derides the growing criticism as blacks joining America's attack on young black men who are only reflecting the crushing problems within their communities. Besides, he says, that's the kind of music America wants to hear. "Look at the music that gets us popular — 'Like a Pimp,'," says Banner, naming his hit. "What makes it so difficult is to know that we need to be doing other things. But the truth is at least us talking about what we're talking about, we can bring certain things to the light," he says. "They want (black artists) to shuck and jive, but they don't want us to tell the real story because they're connected to it."
Criticism of hip-hop is certainly nothing new — it's as much a part of the culture as the beats and rhymes. Among the early accusations were that rap wasn't true music, its lyrics were too raw, its street message too polarizing. But they rarely came from the youthful audience itself, which was enraptured with genre that defined them as none other could. "As people within the hip-hop generation get older, I think the criticism is increasing," says author Bakari Kitwana, who is currently part of a lecture tour titled "Does Hip-Hop Hate Women?" "There was a more of a tendency when we were younger to be more defensive of it," he adds.
During her '90s crusade against rap's habit of degrading women, the late black activist C. Dolores Tucker certainly had few allies within the hip-hop community, or even among young black women. Backed by folks like conservative Republican William Bennett, Tucker was vilified within rap circles. In retrospect, "many of us weren't listening," says Tracy Denean Sharpley-Whiting, a professor at Vanderbilt University and author of the new book "Pimps Up, Ho's Down: Hip-Hop's Hold On Young Black Women." "She was onto something, but most of us said, 'They're not calling me a bitch, they're not talking about me, they're talking about THOSE women.' But then it became clear that, you know what? Those women can be any women."
One rap fan, Bryan Hunt, made the searing documentary "Hip-Hop: Beyond Beats and Rhymes," which debuted on PBS this month. Hunt addresses the biggest criticisms of rap, from its treatment of women to the glorification of the gangsta lifestyle that has become the default posture for many of today's most popular rappers. "I love hip-hop," Hunt, 36, says in the documentary. "I sometimes feel bad for criticizing hip-hop, but I want to get us men to take a look at ourselves."
Even dances that may seem innocuous are not above the fray. Last summer, as the "Chicken Noodle Soup" song and accompanying dance became a sensation, Baltimore Sun pop critic Rashod D. Ollison mused that the dance — demonstrated in the video by young people stomping wildly from side to side — was part of the growing minstrelization of rap music. "The music, dances and images in the video are clearly reminiscent of the era when pop culture reduced blacks to caricatures: lazy 'coons,' grinning 'pickaninnies,' sexually super-charged 'bucks,"' he wrote. And then there's the criminal aspect that has long been a part of rap. In the '70s, groups may have rapped about drug dealing and street violence, but rap stars weren't the embodiment of criminals themselves. Today, the most popular and successful rappers boast about who has murdered more foes and rhyme about dealing drugs as breezily as other artists sing about love.
Creekmur says music labels have overfed the public on gangsta rap, obscuring artists who represent more positive and varied aspects of black life, like Talib Kweli, Common and Lupe Fiasco. "It boils down to a complete lack of balance, and whenever there's a complete lack of balance people are going to reject it, whether it's positive or negative," Creekmur says. Yet Banner says there's a reason why acts like KRS-One and Public Enemy don't sell anymore. He recalled that even his own fans rebuffed positive songs he made — like "Cadillac on 22s," about staying away from street life — in favor of songs like "Like a Pimp." "The American public had an opportunity to pick what they wanted from David Banner," he says. "I wish America would just be honest. America is sick. ... America loves violence and sex."