Technology
Your smartwatch can reveal your ATM PIN
New York: Cyber criminals can easily exploit wearable devices such as smartwatches and fitness trackers to steal sensitive information like your ATM PIN or passwords for electronic door locks, warns a new study.
 
"Wearable devices can be exploited. Attackers can reproduce the trajectories of the user's hand and recover secret key entries to ATM cash machines, electronic door locks and keypad-controlled enterprise servers," said Yan Wang from Binghamton University in the US.
 
The researchers combined data from embedded sensors in wearable technologies such as smartwatches and fitness trackers, along with a computer algorithm to crack private PINs and passwords with 80 per cent accuracy on the first try and more than 90 per cent accuracy after three efforts.
 
The team conducted 5,000 key-entry tests on three key-based security systems, including an ATM, with 20 adults wearing a variety of technologies over 11 months. 
 
They were able to record millimetre-level information of fine-grained hand movements from accelerometers, gyroscopes and magnetometres inside the wearable technologies regardless of a hand's pose. 
 
Those measurements lead to distance and direction estimations between consecutive keystrokes, which the team's "Backward PIN-sequence Inference Algorithm" used to break codes with alarming accuracy without context clues about the keypad.
 
"The threat is real, although the approach is sophisticated," Wang said in the paper presented at the "11th ACM on Asia Conference on Computer and Communications Security" conference in China recently.
 
The researchers did not give a solution for the problem but suggest that developers "inject a certain type of noise to data so it cannot be used to derive fine-grained hand movements, while still being effective for fitness tracking purposes such as activity recognition or step counts".
 
Wang co-authored the study along with Chen Wang from the Stevens Institute of Technology in New Jersey. .
 
Disclaimer: Information, facts or opinions expressed in this news article are presented as sourced from IANS and do not reflect views of Moneylife and hence Moneylife is not responsible or liable for the same. As a source and news provider, IANS is responsible for accuracy, completeness, suitability and validity of any information in this article.

User

Pound hovers around 31-year low
London: The pound sterling on Thursday continued to hover around 31-year lows in Asian trading as more UK property funds suspended withdrawals in the wake of Britain voting to exit the European Union (EU).
 
However, the Japanese yen was rising for a third day against the dollar as investors bought into the currency, seen as a safe haven for their money, BBC reported.
 
It has strengthened by nearly 5 per cent since the UK voted to exit the EU on June 24.
 
The renewed jitters over the fallout from the Brexit vote have also extended a rally in gold prices.
 
The precious metal is trading near its highest price in more than two years.
 
On Wednesday, UK and European stock markets fell sharply and the pound hit a fresh 31-year low as Brexit fears rattled markets.
 
Another three UK property funds said they were suspending trade after a surge in withdrawals following the UK's vote to leave the EU.
 
In Thursday's Asian trade the pound remained lower against the dollar, trading at around $1.2918.
 
Asian stock markets are trading mixed after the latest Federal Reserve minutes showing that prospects of an interest rate hike have diminished.
 
Disclaimer: Information, facts or opinions expressed in this news article are presented as sourced from IANS and do not reflect views of Moneylife and hence Moneylife is not responsible or liable for the same. As a source and news provider, IANS is responsible for accuracy, completeness, suitability and validity of any information in this article.

User

Shocking! Unitech depositors asked to pursue other remedies by Tribunal
The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), the new avatar of Company Law Board (CLB), while dismissing petition filed by Unitech Ltd, has asked "depositors to pursue their remedies as per the law". The NCLT also suggested the concerned Registrar of Companies (RoC) to take appropriate action against the company under section 74(3) of the Companies Act, 2013. Action under this section includes fine of at least Rs1 crore (maximum Rs10 crore) and imprisonment for up to seven years for company official or a fine between Rs25 lakh to Rs2 crore. However, as per section 47 of the Company Law Board Regulations, 1991, the Bench is deemed as a Court or lawful authority for prosecution or punishment of a person who wilfully disobeys any direction or order of such Bench. Therefore, the question here is why the Bench did not use its powers to act against Unitech.
 
In an order on 4 July 2016, BSV Prakash Kumar, Member (Judicial) of the NCLT said, "When this petitioner company could not repay Rs30 crore of money in the time given by this Bench as asked by the company on 11 January 2016, it could not be possible for the company to clear Rs550 crore dues payable to the depositors in near future."
 
"Seeing the developments so far taken place in this case, this Bench is of the opinion that this company could not be in a position to repay the depositors even if further time is extended; therefore this Bench, for having the company defaulted complying with the order dated 11 March 2016, dismissed the petition (CP (T) 10/18/2015) leaving it open to the depositors to pursue their remedies as per law. Accordingly, this Bench hereby suggests RoC concerned to take appropriate action against the company u/s 74(3) of the Companies Act, 2013," the Bench added.
 
Earlier on 11 March 2016, the NCLT had passed an order directing Unitech to repay Rs30 crore of depositor's money on or before 30 June 2016 in three instalments. The company's managing director (MD) had given an undertaking through an affidavit, to repay Rs30 crore between 1st February to 30 September 2016 to depositors who have invested up to Rs25,000, Rs50,000 and Rs1 lakh and whose deposits have matured up to 31 March 2016 as per the original date of maturity. However, the Bench did not agree with the proposal.
 
The MD of Unitech then filed another affidavit on 11 March 2016 undertaking to repay Rs30 crore in three monthly instalments till 30 June 2016. But Unitech did not pay any money.
 
Since 14 May 2015, the Bench said, it has given several adjournments in this matter hoping that the company wold repay money to the depositors at least as per the undertaking given by the company. "But, till date, no undertaking has been complied with. In the past, this Bench even appointed a Sale Committee on 15 July 2015 to generate funds by selling the properties of the company, but no progress has taken place in selling the properties of the company," the Bench noted.
 
It then dismissed the petition filed by Unitech and asked depositors to pursue other legal remedies to recover their invested money. The Bench also suggested the RoC to take appropriate action against Unitech under section 74(3) of the Companies Act, 2013. 
 
Here is what section 74(3) of the Companies Act, 2013 says...
 
Section 74- Repayment of deposits, etc., accepted before commencement of this Act. 
(3) If a company fails to repay the deposit or part thereof or any interest thereon within the time specified in sub-section (1) or such further time as may be allowed by the Tribunal under sub-section (2), the company shall, in addition to the payment of the amount of deposit or part thereof and the interest due, be punishable with fine which shall not be less than Rs1 crore rupees but which may extend to Rs10 crore and every officer of the company, who is in default, shall be punishable with imprisonment, which may extend to seven years or with fine which shall not be less than Rs25 lakh but which may extend to Rs2 crore, or with both.
 
What depositors of Unitech can do now
As per Section 10F of the Companies Act, any person aggrieved by any decision or order of the Company Law Board may file an appeal to the High Court within sixty days from the date of communication of the decision or order of the Company Law Board to him on any question of law arising out of such order.
 
Depositors can request the concerned RoC to initiate action against Unitech under section 74(3) of the Companies Act, 2013.
 
NOTE: We at Moneylife request all readers not to share their mobile number/s here. This is a public platform and your mobile number/s may be misused. Kindly do not post your mobile number/s.

User

COMMENTS

Mahesh Bansal

5 days ago

Unitech and jp associates both are shelters by NCLB therefore invested are not getting their money.

Mahesh Bansal

5 days ago

Unitech and jp associates both are shelters by NCLB therefore invested are not getting their money.

sonia

1 week ago

FINALLY, somebody in Government of India is waking up to the fact that UNITECH is India’s top wealth destroyer, and is therefore putting a bit of heat on its promoters (much, much more heat is needed).
Unitech Ltd., at the time of illegally floating its FD scheme in 2012, had the following directors mentioned on its FD scheme’s forms dated April 14, 2012:

1. Mr. Ramesh Chandra Executive Chairman
2. Mr. Sanjay Chandra Managing Director
3. Mr. Ajay Chandra Managing Director
4. Mr. Ravinder Singhania Director
5. Ms. Minoti Bahri Director
6. Mr. G. R. Ambwani Director (FORMER MCD 1984)
7. Mr. Anil Harish Director
8. Mr. Sanjay Bahadur Director
9. Dr. P.K. Mohanty Director (co-founder of Unitech Ltd., Orissa Sponge Iron ref. also COAL SCAM)

and the following mentioned on the same FD scheme’s forms as managers to the aforementioned illegal FD scheme:
1. BAJAJ CAPITAL LTD. (official financiers of AAP, as per media announcement made by AAP?)
2. KARVY STOCK BROKING LTD.
3. R.R. INVESTORS CAPITAL SERVICES LTD.
4. ALMONDZ GLOBAL SEC. LTD.
5. SMC GLOBAL SECURITIES LTD.
6. JM FINANCIAL SERVICES (P) LTD.
7. HDFC SECURITIES LTD.
8. SECURITY INVESTMENTS LTD.
9. BHARAT BHUSHAN & CO.
10, INDIA INFOLINE LTD.

Therefore, all the above-mentioned Unitech directors, its chairman and investment companies ought to be included in the probe into this illegal FD scheme and punished for willfully cheating the public.


FINALLY, somebody in Government of India is waking up to the fact that UNITECH is India’s top wealth destroyer, and is therefore putting a bit of heat on its promoters (much, much more heat is needed).
Unitech Ltd., at the time of illegally floating its FD scheme in 2012, had the following directors mentioned on its FD scheme’s forms dated April 14, 2012:
1. Mr. Ramesh Chandra Executive Chairman
2. Mr. Sanjay Chandra Managing Director
3. Mr. Ajay Chandra Managing Director
4. Mr. Ravinder Singhania Director
5. Ms. Minoti Bahri Director
6. Mr. G. R. Ambwani Director (FORMER MCD 1984)
7. Mr. Anil Harish Director
8. Mr. Sanjay Bahadur Director
9. Dr. P.K. Mohanty Director (co-founder of Unitech Ltd., Orissa Sponge Iron ref. also COAL SCAM)
and the following mentioned on the same FD scheme’s forms as managers to the aforementioned illegal FD scheme:
BAJAJ CAPITAL LTD. (official financiers of AAP, as per media announcement made by AAP?)
KARVY STOCK BROKING LTD.
R.R. INVESTORS CAPITAL SERVICES LTD.
ALMONDZ GLOBAL SEC. LTD.
SMC GLOBAL SECURITIES LTD.
JM FINANCIAL SERVICES (P) LTD.
HDFC SECURITIES LTD.
SECURITY INVESTMENTS LTD.
BHARAT BHUSHAN & CO.
INDIA INFOLINE LTD.
Therefore, all the above-mentioned Unitech directors, its chairman and investment companies ought to be included in the probe into this illegal FD scheme and punished for willfully cheating the public.


Pramila Tyagi

1 month ago

My FD R no. 1215484 dated 29.04.2013 matured on 05.04.2014 and I sent original receipt to Unitech but no cheque for matured amount received. Even on my personal visit to their office no satisfactory reply from them. Kindly help me. Pramila

Ashok Sachdeva

1 month ago

Dear all, it is not so that depositors can't do anything because they are unsecured creditors. I represented depositors as A.R. before NCLT DELHI, secured order. Then safeguarded the interest of depositors in NCLAT. Now proceeding with decree. Meanwhile pushing the matter along with ROC in Special court Dwarka Delhi. Results are good as on date. May take some more time but need not to get disappointed. All aggrieved may please get in touch Ashok Sachdeva pH. 9953850777 or mail their copies of fds at [email protected] I know it is a difficult situation for depositors living away from Delhi. But kindly have patience and do the needful.
Regards
Ashok Sachdeva

Praveen Sehgal

2 months ago

I THINK COMPANY WILL NOT PAY IN THIS WAY WE ALL HAVE TO GIVE COURT A SUGGESTION AUCTION UNITECH PROPERTY IF THEY NOT PAY IN TIME OR GIVE US UNITECH ANY PROPERTY LEGALLY IN OUR POSESSION

Hemant Gupta

2 months ago

ANY BODY CAN TOLD WHEN UNITECH REFUND MY MATURITY AMOUNT

Hemant Gupta

2 months ago

I HAVE INVEST AS FD BUT MY FD AMOUNT ANT INTEREST NOT GET YET

SHIVAJI THE BOSS

3 months ago

Invest in a bank fd only..the hard lesson I learnt. In India people are meant to be cheated.

Sriram Ranganathan

7 months ago

We all know how the Directors & officers of MICRO TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED, Mahape, Navi Mumbai quickly latched on to a winding up petition filed by Bank of New York Mellon and ensured that the company was wound up quickly. The only small solace left is the company is now to be investigated by the SFIO. All companies are following this beaten track of voluntary or compulsory winding up and taking the "patli gali" route to cheat the depositors and other small lenders. This should STOP and that is possible only if the courts get proactive and first refer these cases to an investigation by EOW / SFIO with a stipulated time frame for completing the investigation first. There are lawyers and other sharks who facilitate the company directors for a fat fee in this process and this also needs to be plugged at the earliest possible.

Sriram Ranganathan

7 months ago

Look at the manner in which one CLB member (now NCLT member) has connived with Unitech Limited and helped them buy time for over 1 year and finally the above stated order is passed. He constituted a "Sale Committee" for the land and ensured that the members of that Committee are paid "fees" and this included a former CLB Chairman. Finally Sale Committee says no sale of land is possible. Does it take >1 year to figure this out? Open connivance and corruption. This needs to be investigated by going through the "sham" orders passed by this member of CLB hearing after hearing. If B K Bansal had not got caught, Elder Pharma too would have taken a similar route. All this is happening under the very nose of the various investigating agencies. Sad state of affairs! Atleast Anuj Saxena of Elder Pharma should be brought to book and monies realised from the assets of the actor and of the company and this needs to be done quickly!!

Dipakkumar J Shah

9 months ago

My one Application for FDR interest paid late is pending Before Company law Board Northern Region against Jindal Steel & Power Limited. Notice had been served to Company. More than 6 years had been passed but nothing ??? Even all mails ids of MCA officers are given on web of MCA are not working at all. Disc Data is full always bounce back.They do not have time to see our mails and disposs of the same. How much Disc Data is given not known? Like Mr ... recent case , like they must be using for taking money from Company nothing else. They might use e mail id for this purpose. In the name of corruption this is going on. There are more Black Money in Offices , Officers of MCA. See the case of M A Kuvadia. When he caught in Ahmedabad as OL in Calico Mills case , he had beennot removed from the post but, I think and belive that he had been promoted to!!!!!

din.neer

9 months ago

The controlling authorities in India are weak and fragile. There is no government body that can assure you that you wont be cheated by any company or individual, and if so, severe consequences will follow. The NCLT has surrendered in a way. I had uploaded the "Investor Complaint Form" on the website of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, but all went in vain. There is no action, neither any response on the issue lodged. I don't know whether approaching consumer court will work in this case or not. All the companies are looting the consumers: Unitech, Pearl, Sahara, JayPee, .... Some people say that this had happened due to a certain change in government rules of accepting deposits, which has barred some non-rating companies from taking deposits. If this is the case, government should ensure before making such rules that deposits of millions of investors don't get sunk.

Dipakkumar J Shah

9 months ago

Governemnt should Inquire about Ethical, Moral Standards, Jurisprudence, Law Iquity and Justice Calibre of the Judge who gave Judgement in this case????? It is need oif the hour when we talked about Corruption. Corruption I mean, my own dictionary meaning "Not to take any actoin amounts to corruption. I have doubts about any reasoning giving verdict against depositors. The word It self is self explanatory?? God save us from all these.I have one experience of Justice Mukhopadhyay in Gujarat High Court ??!!! If he has given the Judgment without any reasoning. Proper inquiry should be made by Government immediately.This also reminds my own case in 58 A with C L B Norther Region against Jindal Steel And Power Limited. Notice is served to the company. Company has never filed reply to petition. No Judgment for last more than 5 to 6 years by C L B Northern Region.??

We are listening!

Solve the equation and enter in the Captcha field.
  Loading...
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email

BUY NOW

The Scam
24 Year Of The Scam: The Perennial Bestseller, reads like a Thriller!
Moneylife Magazine
Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance
Stockletters in 3 Flavours
Outstanding research that beats mutual funds year after year
MAS: Complete Online Financial Advisory
(Includes Moneylife Magazine and Lion Stockletter)