CCC News


IT and Cyber Security News Update from

Centre for Research and Prevention of Computer Crimes, India


Courtesy - Sysman Computers Private Limited, Mumbai (

Since June 2005                                         January 19, 2015                                          Issue no 1532

Tenth year of uninterrupted publication

Today’s edition – 


PHISH : Fake PMO website 'Pradhan mantri adarsh yojna' busted, mastermind nabbed from Kolkata

ATTACK : France Sees 19,000 Cyberattacks Since Terror Rampage

STOLEN : China stole plans for a new fighter plane, spy documents have revealed

THREAT : Cyber Warfare and Cyber Weapons, a Real and Growing Threat

IT Term of the day

Quote of the day


(Click on heading above to jump to related item. Click on “Top” to be back here)



PHISH : Fake PMO website 'Pradhan mantri adarsh yojna' busted, mastermind nabbed from Kolkata

Zee Media Bureau

January 18, 2015


New Delhi: In a major achievement, Delhi Police Crime Branch busted a fake website of the Prime Minister's Office (PMO) named 'Pradhan Mantri Adarsh Yojna'.


According to police, the mastermind of the said racket has been identified as Sudipta Chatterjee, who managed the website from Kolkata. Police arrested him on Saturday after getting a secret information about the fake website which used to cheat several people on the pretext of providing them government loans after receiving some initial deposits.


The website was being run from Howrah in West Bengal with an active call centre with 17 telephone callers who used to give the applicants the registration number of their application form, as per reports.


Interestingly, the tele-callers were specially trained by Sudipta and scripts were provided to them which were prepared with great care and caution, so that the prospective client had no idea of being cheated.


There were a few clauses about the banking transactions, in which the client would be persuaded that he has to maintain a specified amount in his account as security.


The mastermind would also obtain signed cheques, ATM cards, PIN number of the accounts and would direct the client that he should not avail any telebanking or net banking facility on that account.


Once these steps were completed, he would withdraw the security amount from the client`s account.


Chatterjee also disclosed that his associate was a web designer who helped him create other domains by the name of,,,


He also created similar e-mails by the name of and


According to the police official, Chatterjee created the fake website, projected it as a government one and hosted it on a server based in the US.


"To confuse the users, the URL had the reflection of a government website and it was listed on priority with Google. Whenever, any online surfer would search this website would figure in the top hits. There were sufficient reasons to believe it was a government website, he said, " Joint Commissioner of Police (Crime Branch) Ravindra Yadav said on Sunday.


Details of the server were obtained on the basis of the fake URL --


Yesterday, in a joint operation by Delhi and West Bengal Police, Sudipta Chatterjee, the 43-year-old mastermind of the racket, was arrested from Howrah, where the network had its base.


"The fake website was created with the aim of cheating people of their money on the pretext of providing them loans for various projects and schemes," Yadav added.


Twenty mobile phones, hard disks, internet dongles, cheques related to 43 bank accounts, fake project reports, some incriminating documents along with 16 rubber stamps of government offices were recovered from his possession.


Earlier, the PMO had asked the Cyber Security Cell of the Department of IT to block all fake accounts as these had content having "communal overtones" and could have serious ramifications as these could be mistaken as the official account of the PMO.


The PMO had initially asked Twitter to shut down some handles but after it was not done, the matter was referred to the Cyber Security Cell.


The deadline was given after Twitter failed to respond to the Ministry of Home Affairs' request to issue show cause notices on offensive and provocative Twitter handles.


Former Union home secretary RK Singh had then asked the Department of Electronics and Information Technology (DEIT) to serve the ultimatum on Twitter as it failed to comply with the government order to block 28 webpages on its site.



ATTACK : France Sees 19,000 Cyberattacks Since Terror Rampage


Associated Press

Jan 15, 2015


Hackers have targeted about 19,000 French websites since a rampage by Islamic extremists left 20 dead last week, a top French cyberdefense official said Thursday as the president tried to calm the nation's inflamed religious tensions.


France is on edge since last week's attacks, which began Jan. 7 at the satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo. The paper, repeatedly threatened for its caricatures of the Muslim Prophet Muhammad, buried several of its slain staff members Thursday even as it reprinted another weekly issue with Muhammad on its cover.


Calling it an unprecedented surge, Adm. Arnaud Coustilliere, head of cyberdefense for the French military, said about 19,000 French websites had faced cyberattacks in recent days, some carried out by well-known Islamic hacker groups.


The attacks, mostly relatively minor denial-of-service attacks, hit sites as varied as military regiments to pizza shops but none appeared to have caused serious damage, he said. Military authorities launched round-the-clock surveillance to protect the government sites still coming under attack.


"What's new, what's important, is that this is 19,000 sites — that's never been seen before," Coustilliere said. "This is the first time that a country has been faced with such a large wave."


Among the groups suspected of launching the attacks, French officials named MECA: Middle East Cyber Army, Fallaga team and Cyber Caliphate.


According to Arbor Networks, a private company that monitors Internet threats, in the past 24 hours alone, France was the target of 1,070 denial of service attacks. That's about a quarter as many as the United States, but the U.S. hosts 30 times as many websites.


Coustilliere called the attacks a response to the massive demonstrations against terrorism that drew 3.7 million people into the streets Sunday across France. He pointed to "structured groups" that used tactics like posting symbols of jihadist groups on companies' Web sites.


Two of the Paris terror attackers claimed allegiances to al-Qaida in Yemen and a third to the Islamic State group.


Meanwhile, Belgian authorities were looking into possible links between a man they arrested in the southern Charleroi region for illegal trade in weapons and the Paris kosher grocery attacker, Amedy Coulibaly.


"The man claims that he wanted to buy a car from the wife of Coulibaly," said federal prosecutor's spokesman Eric Van der Sypt. "At this moment this is the only link between what happened in Paris."


The terror attacks in Paris occurred in an atmosphere of rising anti-Semitism in France and have prompted scattered retaliatory violence against Muslims and Muslim sites around France. Justice officials have also been cracking down by arresting dozens of people who glorified terrorism or made racist or anti-Semitic remarks.


French President Francois Hollande insisted Thursday that any anti-Muslim or anti-Semitic acts must be "severely punished." He said France's millions of Muslims should be protected and respected, "just as they themselves should respect the nation" and its strictly secular values.


"In the face of terrorism, we are all united," he said at the Institute of the Arab World in Paris.


The government announced Thursday it would give citizenship to a Malian immigrant who saved several Jewish shoppers last week by hiding them in the kosher market's basement before sneaking out to brief police on Coulibaly, the hostage-taker upstairs. Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve said he would personally preside over the ceremony for Lassana Bathily on Tuesday.


Among the victims buried Thursday were Charlie Hebdo cartoonists Georges Wolinski and Bernard Verlhac, both laid to rest in Paris' famed Pere-Lachaise cemetery. Verlhac, who drew under the name Tignous, was buried in a plain wood coffin decorated with cartoons by his friends.


Three other victims of the attacks — Charlie Hebdo columnists Bernard Maris and Elsa Cayat, and Franck Brinsolaro, the policeman bodyguard for slain Charlie Hebdo chief Stephane Charbonnier — were also buried Thursday.


With 120,000 security forces deployed to prevent future attacks, nerves jumped overnight when a car rammed into a policewoman guarding the president's palace. Prosecutors and police said, however, the incident at the Elysee Palace had no apparent links to last week's shootings.


A car carrying four people took a one-way street in the wrong direction then drove off when the police officer tried to stop them. The officer sustained slight leg injuries, police said. Two people were later arrested and two others in the car fled.


Customers lined up again Thursday to try to get copies of Charlie Hebdo's first edition since the attacks. Even though it had a special increased print run of 5 million copies, it sold out before dawn Thursday in Paris kiosks for a second straight day.


Some Muslims, who believe their faith forbids depictions of the prophet, reacted with dismay or anger to the new cover. In Pakistan, lawmakers marched outside parliament Thursday to protest the publication.


A leader of Yemen's al-Qaida branch officially claimed responsibility for the attacks at Charlie Hebdo, saying in a video the slayings were in "vengeance for the prophet." But U.S. and French intelligence officials lean toward an assessment that the Paris terror attacks were inspired by al-Qaida but not directly supervised by the group.


Speaking on the papal plane, Pope Francis expressed his belief that there were limits to freedom of expression, using Alberto Gasparri, who organizes papal trips and was standing by his side, as an example.


"If my good friend Dr. Gasparri says a curse word against my mother, he can expect a punch," Francis said, throwing a pretend punch. "You cannot provoke. You cannot insult the faith of others. You cannot make fun of the faith of others."



STOLEN : China stole plans for a new fighter plane, spy documents have revealed

Chinese cyber spies have stolen details relating to the Joint Strike Fighter, or F-35 Lightning

By Philip Dorling

January 18, 2015


Chinese spies stole key design information about Australia's new Joint Strike Fighter, according to top secret documents disclosed by former US intelligence contractor Edward Snowden.


German magazine Der Spiegel has published new disclosures of signals intelligence collected by the United States National Security Agency (NSA) and its "Five Eyes" partners, including the Australian Signals Directorate. The intelligence reveals new details of the directorate's efforts to track and combat Chinese cyber-espionage.


According to a top secret NSA presentation, Chinese cyber spies have stolen huge volumes of sensitive military information, including "many terabytes of data" relating to the


The leaked document shows that stolen design information included details of the JSF's radar systems which are used to identify and track targets; detailed engine schematics; methods for cooling exhaust gases; and "aft deck heating contour maps".


Although it has been previously alleged the F-35 has been a target of Chinese cyber-espionage, the Snowden documents provide the first public confirmation of how much the highly sensitive data has been compromised.


Military aviation experts have speculated that the design of China's new "fifth-generation" fighters - the Chengdu J-20 and the Shenyang J-31 - have been extensively influenced by design information stolen from the United States, significantly eroding the air power superiority the US and its allies have long enjoyed.


In April 2014 Prime Minister Tony Abbott announced that Australia would buy 58 more F-35 fighters at a cost of more than $12 billion. The extra aircraft will bring Australia's total planned JSF force to 72 aircraft, with the first of them to enter service with the Royal Australian Air Force in 2020.


"The fifth-generation F-35 is the most advanced fighter in production anywhere in the world and will make a vital contribution to our national security," Mr Abbott said.


In June 2013 US Defense Department acquisitions chief Frank Kendall told a US Senate hearing that he was "reasonably confident" classified information related to the development of the F-35 was now well protected.  It is understood the main data breach took place at the prime contractor Lockheed Martin in 2007.


The Snowden documents confirm the Australian Government has been informed of the "serious damage" caused by Chinese cyber-espionage against the JSF. The leaked US NSA briefings, which predate Australia's acquisition of the fighter, are marked as releasable to all members of Five Eyes, which comprises the US, Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.


The Snowden documents also show that Chinese cyber-espionage operations, codenamed "Byzantine Hades" by the Five Eyes partners, have enjoyed other successes with the US Defense Department registering over 500 "significant intrusions" in one year.  Damage assessment and network repair costs amounted to more than $US100 million ($121 million).


Sensitive military technologies and data stolen included information relating to the B-2 stealth bomber; the F-22 Raptor stealth fighter; nuclear submarine and naval air-defence missile designs; and tens of thousands of military personnel records.


The total data theft was estimated to be equivalent to "five Libraries of Congress (50 terabytes)."


However, the documents also show that the NSA and its Five Eyes partners have penetrated China's espionage agencies, such as infiltrating the computer of a high-ranking Chinese military official and accessing information about Chinese intelligence targets in the US government and other foreign governments.


The Australian government has repeatedly refused to comment on specific disclosures from the documents leaked by Mr Snowden. However, federal Attorney-General George Brandis has called Mr Snowden "an American traitor". 



THREAT : Cyber Warfare and Cyber Weapons, a Real and Growing Threat

By Daniel Brecht

15 January 2015


Numerous malicious attacks on computers and mobile devices as well as networks of important entities have recently made the news and have brought back to the surface the debate on cyber warfare and the dangerousness of cyber weapons.


The increasing dependence on the Internet and the recent spur of attacks are beginning to create greater concern.


The fear is not just based on the possibility that a cyber attack could simply cause the non-availability of information and services we are now accustomed to. The Internet has not just reshaped the way we obtain news, communicate with others, take care of our finances, watch TV and listen to music, but it is also permeating other essential fields of our lives.


From power smart grids to the “Internet of Things,” the potential targets of cyber warriors are now multiple and the possible consequences catastrophic. Premeditated, politically or socially motivated attacks against a computer-dependent society could be orchestrated by foreign powers and affect nations at any level: from the availability of utilities, to denied access to important financial and medical information, to causing a significant impact on national GDPs.


This article will explore the concept of cyber warfare and cyber weapons, plus recount latest happenings and discuss whether the danger is real.


Cyber Warfare and Cyber Weapons


The definition of cyber warfare and cyber weapons is not as clear-cut as it might seem. Distinguishing these attacks from simple cyber crimes is essential to define rules of engagements by countries and to establish what should be considered a direct act of war against the sovereignty and wellbeing of a state.


According to the Tallin Manual on the International Law Applicable to Cyber Warfare – a study commissioned by the NATO Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence that is not considered a legally binging document – cyber weapons are cyber means of warfare designed, used or intended to cause either injury or death of people or damage to or destruction of objects.


Without a globally recognized definition, however, it is hard to strictly define and recognize true acts of cyber warfare, prevent attacks, hold entities accountable and define legal responses. The inability to agree to basic notions is a considerable weakness in the international arena and leaves space to much uncertainty and endless possibilities for nations beginning to employ these warfare techniques.


Several definitions have been given by scholars, but, in general, a cyber weapon is intuitively considered any software, virus, and intrusion device that can disrupt critical infrastructures of other countries, from military defense systems to communications to electric power smart grids to financial systems and air traffic control.


Debates have been rising on the possibility to consider cyber weapons tools used not only to directly impair systems but also to spy on nations through cyber espionage. Again, the lack of a globally-recognized legal definition doesn’t help.


Have cyber weapons ever been deployed? You may recognize an incident that happened in 2009, the first known use of a cyber weapon: Stuxnet. It was a complex piece of malware believed to be an example of government cyber weapon aimed at severely disrupting the Iranian nuclear program. The paternity of the attack has been a source of debate, but in the end, it was believed to be a joint US/Israel operation. Stuxnet targeted a plant in Natanz, Iran. By turning off valves and impairing centrifuges, equipment was damaged and the Iranian uranium enrichment program effectively slowed down.


However, Stuxnet might have not even been the first cyber war tool directed toward Iran. Flame, another powerful malware that masqueraded itself as a routine Microsoft software update, had already been used to map and monitor Iranian networks and collect critical information.


Is a Cyber World War a Concern?


A 2013 report by Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper explained that the possibility of a major cyber attack to US critical infrastructures causing a long-term and widespread disruption of services by major players like Russia and China is remote. However, smaller scale attacks by smaller states or non-state entities seem to be a concern. According to the report, “less advanced but highly motivated actors could access some poorly protected US networks that control core functions, such as power generation, during the next two years, although their ability to leverage that access to cause high-impact, systemic disruptions will probably be limited. At the same time, there is a risk that unsophisticated attacks would have significant outcomes due to unexpected system configurations and mistakes, or that vulnerability at one node might spill over and contaminate other parts of a networked system.”


This may not come as a surprise to anyone, but any telecommunications infrastructure attack could cause enough harm to generate fear. Every government or corporation entire infrastructure, let alone the public at large, may be at stake.


Can digital attacks really have tangible effects? Absolutely. An oil pipeline in Turkey was cyber attacked and exploded in 2008. The pipeline was super-pressurized and alarms were shut off. By hacking security cameras, attackers (allegedly Russian) were able to hide the blast from the control room that, unaware, was unable to respond promptly. Another attack to a German steel company demonstrated how, by simply infiltrating the information systems running the plant, hackers could cause major damage.


Although not a single Internet successful attack has been recognized as directed by a foreign terror organization against the United States homeland, there have been instances of intrusions intended to inflict significant harm on the American government or state agency, as well as US businesses. Last November, there was an intrusion into the networks of the Department of the State that led to the unclassified email system shutdown. Carol Morello, the diplomatic correspondent for The Washington Post who covered the affair, noted the activity was related to hacking of White House computers reported a month prior, and to security breaches that occurred at both the U.S. Postal Service and the National Weather Service. Those incidents pointed to Russian hackers as prime suspects; the perpetrators were believed to be working directly for the Russian government. Sony Pictures Entertainment (SPE) is another recent case; its networks were infected in a November 2014 incident. According to the FBI, the occurrence resembled past cyber efforts by North Korea.


What makes a cyber warfare attack appealing? Mainly the fact that it can come at little or no cost for the perpetrator. An attacker with great technical capabilities can create disruption by using a single computer wherever he or she is located. While the use of conventional weapons requires expensive manufacturing and physical travel to target locations, cyber attacks can be conducted from anywhere. Traditional weapons have a cost that might be prohibitive for many and are hard to transport (or deliver) in secrecy. In other cases, attacks might require the sacrifice of the offenders. Cyber attacks are quick, can be equally destructive and can definitely be inexpensive to execute.


According to Amy Chang, research associate at the Center for a New American Security, “Cyber warfare is a great alternative to conventional weapons. […] It is cheaper for and far more accessible to these small nation-states. It allows these countries to pull off attacks without as much risk of getting caught and without the repercussions when they are.”


Accountability is hard to prove when cyber weapons are used. By using several proxies or infecting computers indirectly, it is difficult to trace back to a particular malicious hacker or organization on any form of attacks. And even if a culprit is found, it is hard to accuse a nation of a deliberate act of war, especially due to lack of a legal framework.


The problem today is that we live in a high-tech world of uncertainty where people are not well trained and equipped for these new threats that can disrupt communications, and network traffic to and from websites and can potentially paralyze Internet service providers (ISPs) at the international level across national borders. So, in the face of constant security threats, there is a need for all to fully understand how to handle cyber security issues and cyber war and how to mitigate risks and minimize the damage, as best as possible if the circumstances arise.


Cyberspace and its Security


What can be done and who should act in defense of a nation’s cyberspace? The answer may be complicated. Defending cyberspace is not an easy feat, considering the number of interconnected computers, mobile devices and networks. The majority of the systems, including those regulating nations’ critical infrastructures, are interconnected and then vulnerable not only to direct attacks but also to infection by transmission. Ironically, the numerous technological advances might also pose a risk, as cyber terrorists seem to be always a step forward in identifying security vulnerabilities before security experts can patch them. Lack of recognized rules in cyberspace and difficulty to implement boundaries complete the picture.


Lacking a real global response to cyber warfare, many countries and organizations are creating structures and task forces to prepare against cyber threats. According to intelligence studies, more than 140 countries have funded cyber weapon development programs. The U.S. is particularly active and created the USCYBERCOM that “plans, coordinates, integrates, synchronizes, and conducts activities to: direct the operations and defense of specified Department of Defense information networks and; prepare to, and when directed, conduct full-spectrum military cyberspace operations in order to enable actions in all domains, ensure US/Allied freedom of action in cyberspace and deny the same to our adversaries.”


In 2012, the U.S. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) invested $110 million in Plan X, a “Cyberspace is now recognized as a critical domain of operations by the U.S. military and its protection is a national security issue. Plan X is a foundational cyberwarfare program to develop platforms for the Department of Defense to plan for, conduct, and assess cyber warfare in a manner similar to kinetic warfare.” The program was included in DARPA’s reported $1.54 billion cyber budget for 2013-2017.


Recently, the U.S. Naval Academy also received $120M to build a classified cyber warfare center in 2016. The center will allow midshipmen to work on classified system and acquire cyber warfare skills.


Organizations like the European Advanced Cyber Defence Centre (ACDC), the NATO Computer Incident Response Capability (NCIRC) and the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), amongst many others, are working on fighting back against organized, international cyber criminals that have used cyberspace as a warfighting domain.


However, this may not be enough to avoid terrorism-based cyberwar attacks, so everyone ought to prepare proactively and effectively by securing systems as much as possible. In an Internet-connected world, every end user is at risk, either directly or indirectly. The Internet provides many different ways to attack. Internet-connected systems must be secured on a global scale.


With cyberspace being so vast, flexible, and unregulated, all its users are highly vulnerable to dangers from outside threats. Recent cyber attacks highlight the potential threat posed by information warfare tactics and techniques that use computer connectivity and exploit vulnerabilities sometimes caused by users’ inattentiveness or lack of basic cyber security practices.


Proper use of intrusion-detection and intrusion-prevention systems (IDS/IPS) and firewalls (a network’s first line of defense against threats) is a basic response. Through real-time analysis of network traffic—i.e., to investigate and contain these security threats—people can detect the majority of the less sophisticated hacking attacks at a user level.


Larger companies must be more aware than ever about their network security vulnerabilities and secure their properties with proper Advanced Threat Protection Platforms for endpoint protection and server security.


In the case of government-orchestrated cyber attacks, one of the main lines of defense is the creation of a common front against attackers. There is no better time than now to open collaboration and dialogue amongst various industries and government agencies to take action. Attacks against larger, interconnected systems might be more easily disclosed by comparing data and creating common task forces. Detection and prevention alone may not be enough to stop the attackers, each time, but at least it may inhibit future, similar threats.


The Internet might be becoming a new weapon for terrorists, so overcoming cyber vulnerability requires multiple different organizations to come forward and stop the launch of cyber threats that can manipulate the physical world while operating without international boundaries.




Some of the numerous larger-scale cyber attacks can be intuitively considered acts of cyber war. With many countries large and small investing in cyber warfare, it is impossible not to think of the use of “information warfare” as a new form of terrorism. Information warfare goes beyond simply attacking computers and communications networks, as a computer-literate terrorist can wreak havoc causing physical destruction and harm to populations. The Internet can be turned into a weapon used against targets by terrorists hidden in cyberspace to carry out cyber violence and disruption, while being physically located elsewhere. Computer-related crimes, as an extension of terrorist attacks, have the potential of bringing catastrophic side effects.


Cyberspace is increasingly becoming a place of risk and danger, vulnerable to hacks and cyber warfare. With today’s civilization dependent on interconnected cyber systems to virtually operate many of the critical systems that make our daily lives easier, it is obvious that cyber warfare can be the choice for many governments and states, especially those that don’t have access to expensive, conventional weapons of mass destruction.


So, how do we counteract such attacks? If cyber warfare is considered war, then anti-terrorism defenses must be deployed. First, though, a legal basis for responses to attacks must be defined. A legal definition of cyber war and cyber weapon, a definition agreed upon globally, is necessary to define the perimeters within which nations can operate in cyberspace. It is important to define what to consider cyber espionage, cyber war or an act of simple hacking.


Lacking a clear definition and a global cyber etiquette, nations are left with creating their own defense against cyber weapons and cyber espionage. Exploring real-world examples, continuously monitoring the Information Superhighway, and endorsing cyber security awareness, web security and online safety are the tools currently available for an effective international governance of the Internet.


Although the United States has not been subjective to real, destructive cyber terrorism as of today, in terms of hostile action or threat, it has identified a number of ways terrorists can use the computer as a tool for hacking or information warfare. As the job of a cyberterrorist has become more difficult to detect, in time, information control may also be critical for successful counter-terrorism and avoidance of infrastructure warfare.


Therefore, it is paramount to investigate some common defense mechanisms that can help pinpoint and capture these threats before they affect massive numbers of people and impair activities in a much more pervasive way.



IT Term of the day

Domain Suffix

A domain suffix is the last part of a domain name and is often referred to as a "top-level domain" or TLD. Popular domain suffixes include ".com," ".net," and ".org," but there are dozens of domain suffixes approved by ICANN.


Each domain suffix is intended to define the type of website represented by the domain name. For example, ".com" domains are meant for commercial websites, whereas ".org" domains are to be used by organizations. However, since any entity can register domain names with these suffixes, the domain suffix does not always represent the type of website that uses the domain name. For example, many individuals and organizations register ".com" domain names for non-commercial purposes, since the ".com" domain is the most recognized.


Each country also has a unique domain suffix that is meant to be used for websites within the country. For example, Brazilian websites may use the ".br" domain suffix, Chinese websites may use the ".cn" suffix, and Australian websites may use the ".au" suffix. These country-based TLDs, sometimes referred to as "country codes," are also used to specify different versions of an international website. For example, the German home page for Google is "" instead of ""



Quote of the day

The means of defense against foreign danger historically have become the instruments of tyranny at home.


James Madison   



Note -

  1. As a member of this group, you get useful information to protect yourself and your IT assets and processes from various Computer and Related Crimes.
  2. If you think that your other friends/colleagues/acquaintances/relatives/foes/enemies also needs this information, forward the mail to them and request them to send their e-mail addresses and names to us with subject as "Subscribe".
  3. If you or someone has become victim of Computer Crimes or has any query on prevention, you are welcome to write to us.
  4. If you are not interested in it and would like to unsubscribe - send a reply mail with subject as "Unsubscribe".
  5. Disclaimer - We have taken due care to research and present these news-items to you. Though we've spent a great deal of time researching these matters, some details may be wrong. If you use any of these items, you are using at your risk and cost. You are required to verify and validate before any usage. Most of these need expert help / assistance to use / implement. For any error or loss or liability due to what-so-ever reason, CRPCC and/or Sysman Computers (P) Ltd. and/or any associated person / entity will not be responsible.