Top 10 Tech stories 2014: Backlash! Disrupting the disruptors

Blowing up entrenched business models and picking up the profits that spill onto the floor is a time-honored tradition in tech, these days known by the cliche of the moment, “disruption.” This year everyone was trying to push back against those upstarts, whether by buying them like Facebook did, reorganizing to compete with them like HP and Microsoft have done, or just plain going out against them guns blazing, as it seemed that every city and taxi company did with Uber. European courts fought the disruptive effect Google search has had on our very sense of the historical record. But meanwhile, legions of net neutrality supporters in the US spoke up to save the Internet’s core value of disruption against the oligopoly of a handful of communications carriers. Here are our picks for the top stories of a very, well, disruptive year.
year in review 2014

Nadella aims Microsoft toward relevancy in a post-PC world
Taking over from Steve Ballmer in February, CEO Satya Nadella faced several uncomfortable truths, among them: Windows powers only 15 percent of all computing devices worldwide, including smartphones, tablets and PCs, meaning Microsoft is no longer at the center of most people’s computing experience. Nadella says he wants Microsoft to be the productivity and platform company for a “mobile first, cloud first world.” Under Nadella, Microsoft has launched Office for the iPad, embraced open source software for its Azure cloud and launched the beta for Windows 10, which promises to smooth out Windows 8’s confusing, hybrid user interface. Shortly after closing the Nokia acquisition he inherited, Nadella announced 18,000 job cuts, 14 percent of its global staff. The bulk of those cuts are in Nokia, which has been relegated to the “other” market share category in smartphones. Microsoft’s sales looked good last quarter, jumping 25 percent year-over-year to $23.2 billion, though profit was hurt by the Nokia buy. Nadella claimed the company is “innovating faster,” which had better be true if he is to succeed.

HP says breaking up is hard, but necessary
Agility appears to be more important than size these days. In an about-face from the direction CEO Meg Whitman set three years ago, Hewlett-Packard announced in October that it will split up, divorcing its PC and printer operations from its enterprise business. When Whitman took the reins from former HP chief Leo Apotheker in 2011, she renounced his idea to split up the venerable Silicon Valley company, saying PCs were key to long-term relationships with customers. But shedding assets is becoming a common strategy for aging tech giants. IBM has focused on enterprise technology and services after selling first its PC operations years ago, and then its server business this year, to Lenovo, and agreeing in October to pay GlobalFoundries $1.5 billion to take over money-losing chip facilities. Symantec announced this year that it would spin off its software storage business, the bulk of which it acquired 10 years ago from Veritas Software for $13.5 billion. The big question for HP is whether it can avoid alienating users and distracting its hundreds of thousands of employees.

Uber’s bumpy ride shakes up the “sharing” economy
Legal challenges and executives behaving badly marked the ascendancy of Uber this year as much as its explosive growth and sky-high valuation. The startup’s hard-driving, take-no-prisoners culture has made it an unlikely poster child for the innocuous—and perhaps misleadingly labeled—“sharing” economy. Announcing the company’s latest billion-dollar cash injection in December, CEO Travis Kalanick bragged that Uber had launched operations in 190 cities and 29 countries this year. The service is now valued at $40 billion. But the company’s army of private drivers face legal challenges, inquiries and preliminary injunctions against operating, from Germany and the UK to various US states. Executives have made matters worse by threatening to dig up dirt on critical journalists and bragging about a tool called “god view” that lets employees access rider logs without permission. Rival app-based ride services like Lyft and Sidecar, whose operations are also the target of inquiries, are distancing themselves from Uber. Added to all this, there are complaints about the legality of other sorts of so-called sharing services, like apartment-rental site Airbnb, which has spawned not just opportunities for regular folks with an extra room and a hospitable nature, but created a class of real-estate investors who are de facto hoteliers. All this suggests that Web-based companies seeking a “share” of profits using middleman tech platforms to disrupt highly regulated businesses like taxis and lodging have some real battles against entrenched interests still to fight.

Facebook gambles $16 billion on WhatsApp
Established companies are snapping up upstarts at a pace not seen since the dot-com boom days, but in February Facebook’s plan to buy WhatsApp for $16 billion had jaws dropping at the price tag. WhatsApp has hit about a half billion users with its mobile messaging alternative to old-school carriers. Facebook already had a chat feature, as well as a stand-alone mobile app called Messenger. But people don’t use them for quick back and forth conversations, as CEO Mark Zuckerberg has acknowledged. At the Mobile World Congress in Barcelona, he confessed that he could not prove in charts and figures that WhatsApp is worth the money he spent, but said that not many companies in the world have a chance at cracking the billion-user mark, and that in itself is incredibly valuable.

Mt Gox implodes, deflating Bitcoin hype
Last year, Bitcoin seemed poised to disrupt conventional currencies. But this year the high-flying cryptocurrency hit some turbulence. The largest Bitcoin exchange in the world, Tokyo-based Mt Gox, fell to earth amid tears and lawsuits after an apparent hack cost the company about 750,000 bitcoins worth about $474 million. The company said a flaw in the Bitcoin software allowed an unknown party to steal the digital currency. A few weeks later Flexcoin, a smaller site, closed after it got hacked. The closures sent tremors of fear through the fledgling Bitcoin market. The leaders of Coinbase, Kraken, Bitstamp, BTC China, Blockchain and Circle all signed a statement lambasting Mt Gox for its “failings.” But the incidents took the luster off Bitcoin. Still, New York’s proposed Bitcoin regulations may establish a legal framework, and confidence, to help exchanges grow in one of the world’s biggest financial centers. Bitcoin concepts may also spur spinoff technology. A company called Blockstream is pursuing ideas to use Bitcoin’s so-called blockchain, a distributed, public ledger, as the basis for a platform for all sorts of transactional applications.

Apple Pay starts to remake mobile payments
Apple’s ascendance to the world’s most valuable company came on top of market-defining products like the iPod, iTunes, the iPhone and the iPad. This year, it was not the iPhone 6 or the as-yet unreleased Apple Watch that came close to redefining a product category—it was Apple Pay. Apple Pay requires an NFC-enabled Apple device, which means an iPhone 6 or 6 Plus, but by early next year, Apple Watch as well. Businesses need NFC-equipped payment terminals. With Apply Pay, you can make a credit or debit card payment simply by tapping your iPhone to the NFC chip reader embedded in a payment terminal. As you tap, you put your finger on the iPhone 6’s biometric fingerprint reader. Apple was careful to line up partners: while Google stumbled trying to get support for its Wallet, more than 500 banks and all major credit card companies are working with Apple Pay. The potential security benefits top it off: When you enter your credit or debit card number, Apple replaces it with a unique token that it stores encrypted. Your information is never stored on your device or in the cloud.

Alibaba’s IPO marks a new era for Chinese brands
In their first day of trading on the New York Stock Exchange in September, Alibaba shares opened at $92.70, 35 percent over the $68 initial public offering price, raking in $21.8 billion and making it the biggest tech IPO ever. Alibaba is an e-commerce behemoth in China, now looking to expand globally. But don’t expect a direct challenge to Amazon right away. Its strategy for international dominance depends not only on broad e-commerce, but also on carving out different niche marketplaces. Shares three months after its opening are going for about $10 more, suggesting that shareholders have faith in that strategy. The IPO also marked the ascendancy of Chinese brands. After scooping up IBM’s PC business years ago, and this year spending $2.3 billion for IBM’s server business as well as $2.9 billion for Motorola, Lenovo is the world’s number one PC company and number three smartphone company. Meanwhile Xiaomi, the “Apple of China,” has become the world’s number-four smartphone vendor.

Regin and the continuing saga of the surveillance state
Symantec’s shocking report on the Regin malware in November opened the latest chapter in the annals of international espionage. Since at least 2008, Regin has targeted mainly GSM cellular networks to spy on governments, infrastructure operators, research institutions, corporations, and private individuals. It can steal passwords, log keystrokes and read, write, move and copy files. The sophistication of the malware suggests that, like the Stuxnet worm discovered in 2010, it was developed by one or several nation-states, quite possibly the U.S. It has spread to at least 10 countries, mainly Russia and Saudi Arabia, as well as Mexico, Ireland, India, Afghanistan, Iran, Belgium, Austria and Pakistan. If Regin really is at least six years old, it means that sophisticated surveillance tools are able to avoid detection by security products for years, a chilling thought for anyone trying to protect his data.

EU ‘right to be forgotten’ ruling challenges Google to edit history
The EU’s Court of Justice’s so-called right to be forgotten ruling in May means that Google and other search engine companies face the mountainous task of investigating and potentially deleting links to outdated or incorrect information about a person if a complaint is made. The ruling came in response to a complaint lodged by Spanish national insisting that Google delete links to a 1998 newspaper article that contained an announcement for a real-estate auction related to the recovery of social security debts owed by him. The complaint noted the issue had been resolved. But while EU data-privacy officials cheer, free-speech advocates say the ruling’s language means that people can use it to whitewash their history, deleting even factually correct stories from search results. As of mid-November, Google had reviewed about 170,000 requests to delist search results that covered over 580,000 links. The headaches are just starting: Now the EU says the delinking must be applied to all international domains, not just sites within the region.

Obama weighs in as FCC goes back to the drawing boards on net neutrality
In January, a U.S. appeals court struck down the FCC’s 2011 regulations requiring Internet providers to treat all traffic equally. The court said the FCC did not have the authority to enact the rules, challenged in a lawsuit brought by Verizon. The ruling reignited the net neutrality debate, with FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler proposing new rules in April. President Obama in November made his strongest statement on net neutrality to date, urging the FCC to reclassify broadband as a regulated utility, imposing telephone-style regulations. Obama’s move, which critics say is an unprecedented intrusion on an independent government agency, puts political pressure on Wheeler, who reportedly favors a less regulatory approach. The proposal from Wheeler earlier this year stopped short of reclassification, and allowed broadband providers to engage in “commercially reasonable” traffic management. Public comments on Wheeler’s proposal had hit nearly 4 million by September. The ball is now back in Wheeler’s court, as he negotiates a resolution to the whole affair with his fellow commissioners.

---

Best Microsoft MCTS Certification, Microsoft MCITP Training at certkingdom.com

Cisco patches traffic snooping flaw in its networking gear

The vulnerability affects the OSPF routing protocol implementation on Cisco networking equipment

Cisco Systems said attackers could disrupt or intercept traffic in many of its networking products unless a new security update is applied to the software they run.

The issue affects the implementation of the Open Shortest Path First (OSPF) routing protocol and its Link State Advertisement (LSA) database in particular. This protocol is used for determining the shortest routing paths inside an Autonomous System (AS) -- a collection of routing policies for IP (Internet Protocol) addresses controlled by ISPs and large organizations.

[ InfoWorld's expert contributors show you how to secure your Web browsers in a free PDF guide. Download it today! | Learn how to protect your systems with Roger Grimes' Security Adviser blog and Security Central newsletter, both from InfoWorld. ]

[ Security expert Cricket Liu lays out the workings of a DNS-based DDoS attack -- and how to prevent one from hitting your company. Download the PDF today! | Stay up to date on the latest security developments with InfoWorld's Security newsletter. ]

The OSPF protocol is commonly used on large enterprise networks. It gathers link state information from available routers into a database in order to built a network topology map which is then used to determine the best route for IP traffic.

"This vulnerability could allow an unauthenticated attacker to take full control of the OSPF Autonomous System (AS) domain routing table, blackhole traffic, and intercept traffic," Cisco said in a security advisory.

Exploiting the vulnerability doesn't require authentication and can be achieved remotely by sending specifically crafted OSPF LSA type 1 packets via unicast or multicast to the vulnerable device. The packets could contain false routes that would then get propagated throughout the entire OSPF AS domain.

However, the attacker does need to determine some information in advance in order to launch a successful attack, Cisco said. This information includes the network placement and IP address of the targeted router, the LSA database sequence numbers and the router ID of the OSPF Designated Router (DR).

The vulnerability affects networking devices running most versions of Cisco IOS, IOS-XE and NX-OS operating systems if they are configured for OSPF operations. It also affects the software running on the Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA), Cisco ASA Service Module (ASA-SM), Cisco Pix Firewall, Cisco Firewall Services Module (FWSM) and the Cisco ASR 5000 carrier class platform.

---

Best CCNA Training and CCNA Certification and more Cisco exams log in to Certkingdom.com

What happens next in the Cisco suit against Arista?

Although the outcome is uncertain, the case will likely go to trial

Arista Networks’ stock took it on the chin when Cisco slapped the company with patent infringement and copyright law suits last Friday, losing almost 20% of its value at one point as investors and others mulled the long term implications of the suits.

The short answer: this is going to take a long time and could get pretty ugly for Arista.

One of the suits accuses Arista of violating 14 Cisco patents, while the second is for extensive copying of Cisco’s user manuals and multi-word CLI commands (see Cisco slaps Arista Networks with patent, copyright infringement suits).

Arista has been fairly mum on the suits, but did post a piece by board member Dan Scheinman, who formerly worked for Cisco, saying “Arista’s EOS was developed from the ground up as a next generation network operating system for the cloud based upon the pioneering technologies invented by Arista” (see Arista fires back at Cisco's suits).

Scheinman ends his post posing the question, “Why now? The answer to that question speaks volumes about the real motivation going on here.”

The conclusion we are apparently expected to reach is that Arista has unique technology and its growing success is a thorn in Cisco’s side, hence the suits. Sales growth would support that notion. When Arista filed for its IPO last June it said sales in 2013 were $361 million, up more than 90% compared to 2012, and according to some estimates, the company will finish 2014 with sales leaping another 60% to $577 million (across that magic $500 million line that proves to be the limit for many network startups).

“Arista has good products and obviously a strong engineering staff,” says Joel Snyder, a senior partner at tech consulting firm Opus One, and a longtime product reviewer for Network World. “People are starting to take note, and obviously they are making some noise that Cisco is noticing.”

One large financial services company I spoke with this summer said they are installing Arista equipment to complement their largely Cisco network environment, adding anecdotal evidence that Arista is making inroads in critical accounts. Asked if this lawsuit will make them reconsider adding Arista equipment, the company said it will proceed as planned.

That’s at least some good news. The bad news: Arista will have its hands full with these suits, says Charles Steenburg, an associate at Wolf Greenfield, an intellectual property law firm in Boston. While Arista might file a motion to dismiss the complaints, “in a case like this, dismissal is highly unlikely,” he says.

While trials are the exception rather than the rule in patent infringement cases, especially in cases brought by patent trolls who are just after cash settlements, “cases involving competitors more often go to trial,” Steenburg says.

Discovery and the claim construction phase, in which the judge asks for input from the parties and outlines certain key patent terms, can take about a year, he says. Using the Apple/Samsung trials as a gauge, which were filed in the same California district, Steenberg says these cases might start in 16 to 26 months.

Asked how dire a situation this could create for Arista, Steenburg says “the nuclear scenario would be for Cisco to get an injunction that prohibits Arista from selling the products in question.” But at the very least, the cases are “certainly going to make life difficult” for Arista.

“The discovery process itself is not just expensive, but also time consuming and can sap morale,” Steenburg says. “It stinks to have engineers and other employees being deposed or gathering documents instead of doing constructive work. That is often an unappreciated cost and risk of litigation.”

Snyder says he thinks “Cisco has a legitimate beef. They may or may not prevail, but it opens up enough FUD to give the Cisco sales team something to use in competitive deals. Right now Cisco is fighting hard to keep its place in the enterprise, and one of their tools is pricing. If they can force others to have higher costs, either through engineering or litigation or both, then this is a competitive edge.”


Should potential customers worry? “I would counsel any client thinking of doing business with a company that has been sued for patent infringement to ask to be indemnified in case the company goes after them,” Steenburg says. “That said, presumably Cisco does business with most of Arista’s customers, so it would be unusual for Cisco to go after customers.”

In the copyright suit Cisco says that, among other infringements, Arista has copied 500 of its multi-word command line instructions. While Google and others argue copyright protection shouldn’t address interfaces, some observers see it otherwise.

“’Ip host’ all by itself isn't copyrightable,” writes Florian Mueller, an intellectual property activist with 25 years of software industry expertise in his blog Foss Patents, “Same with ‘show inventory.’ Arista could have copied one or two of those and Cisco couldn't complain if that were the case. But when one looks at the whole list of 500 multi-word commands, many of which truly involve creative choices (for example, ‘show ip igmp snooping querier’ or ‘spanning-tree potfast bpdufilter default’), the threshold for copyrightability is easily met.”

---

Best CCNA Training and CCNA Certification and more Cisco exams log in to Certkingdom.com