From Using Firesheep is illegal in the US, UK, and most of the world:

One thing that many sites have glossed over is the inherent illegality of using Firesheep. "Go on! Try it! It's cool!" -- yes, it is shockingly cool, but if you use it on a public network you are breaking the law.

In general, the interception of any communication -- digital or otherwise -- is prohibited by law. Government agencies are the only exception and even then a warrant is usually required. Firesheep, by intercepting digital communication and re-routing it to your Web browser is a wiretap. Unless you're trying to crack the local organized crime racket and you have a warrant in your pocket, you are breaking the law.

Making something illegal doesn't mean people--especially criminals--won't do it. Besides, one could argue that this communication is being broadcast unencrypted and can easily be sniffed passively, thus one should not have had a reasonable expectation of privacy.

The goal of this program isn't to let people hijack each other's web sessions anyway, it's to clearly demonstrate the threat of using unencrypted WiFi using unencrypted protocols, which has existed since WiFi was first conceived. Unfortunately, easy-to-use programs like this are what's needed to apply the appropriate pressure to change our protocols and practices.

From Why Firesheep’s Time Has Come | Steve (GRC) Gibson's Blog:

In case you’ve been somewhere off the grid, and have somehow missed the news, Firesheep is an incredibly easy to use add-on for the Firefox web browser that, when invoked while connected to any open and unencrypted WiFi hotspot, lists every active web session being conducted by anyone sharing the hotspot, and allows a snooping user to hijack any other user’s online web session logon with a simple double-click of the mouse. The snooper, then logged on and impersonating the victim, can do anything the original logged on user/victim might do.

I've experimented with Firesheep on my own system. Normally, I use Google Chrome, but I installed a fresh copy of Firefox just for the occasion to try Firesheep.

Within a few moments, I was able to pick up web sessions happening from my Google Chrome browser. I was able to use both my Facebook and Twitter from Firefox without having to log into them! It did pick up my Google login, but before I hit Gmail, I had to provide authentication. Remember, this was a fresh installation of Firefox on a machine that did not previously have Firefox installed at all!

This is scary stuff. As Steve Gibson says, though, this has always been possible with unencrypted WiFi by anyone with enough 1337 5killz to pull it off. Now, it's as simple as installing a web browser plugin.

From an article on Cnet announcing a mobile security product:

The [product] runs on all mobile operating systems and devices. It includes antivirus, personal firewall, antispam, and remote monitoring and control services. It remotely backs up and restores data and can locate devices that are lost and stolen, as well as wipe data from stolen devices. It also can send an alert when a SIM card has been removed or replaced. For enterprise users, it protects devices accessing networks with SSL-based virtual private network.

And it makes great toast, too!

Reality check. The functionality of the above mentioned product is highly dependent on the mobile platform we're talking about. A quick trip to the vendor's website shows you what options are available on which platform, and it's clearly not the same.

Mobile operating systems are designed more secure from the get-go. That doesn't completely reduce the need for security, but it does reduce or eliminate certain classes of threats. Also, each mobile OS has their own unique restrictions on the kinds of apps that can be written. Each mobile OS has different security services that can be utilized in different ways.

In short, what you can do on iPhone and what you can do on Android are very different. Even if a vendor provides the same application on multiple platforms, it is not going to provide the same level of functionality. It simply cannot.

The author of the above-linked piece did not even attempt to articulate this critical point. If you're looking at a mobile security solution for your enterprise, you simply have to be aware of this reality so as you don't expect something that cannot be delivered.

Disclaimer: My employer offers a competing product: Mobile Access Software Blade. However, the above thoughts are my own.

From Check Point isn't for sale, says Shwed - Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News:

Two months ago, antivirus systems giant McAfee was sold to Intel for $7.7 billion. At the time, a number of analysts suggested that Check Point Software Technologies would also be an attractive target for takeover. Gil Shwed, the company's founder and leader, yesterday shrugged at the idea in conversation with reporters, after the company filed its third-quarter financials.

Anything's possible, Shwed said: but he's been very consistent in his position for the last 17 years, which is that Check Point isn't for sale. "We are very proud of the fact that we are an Israeli company, an independent one," he said.

Why would Check Point put themselves up for sale when the financials continue to be strong and only getting better? I think it's just "wishful thinking" by the analysis.

Disclaimer: I work for Check Point.

From Schneier on Security: Stuxnet:

Computer security experts are often surprised at which stories get picked up by the mainstream media. Sometimes it makes no sense. Why this particular data breach, vulnerability, or worm and not others? Sometimes its obvious. In the case of Stuxnet, theres a great story.

As the story goes, the Stuxnet worm was designed and released by a government--the U.S. and Israel are the most common suspects--specifically to attack the Bushehr nuclear power plant in Iran. How could anyone not report that? It combines computer attacks, nuclear power, spy agencies and a country thats a pariah to much of the world. The only problem with the story is that its almost entirely speculation.

What strikes me about the Stuxnet story is that it's really "nothing new." Yes there were some new zero-day vulnerabilities found. However, a virus that propagates by rogue USB keys? Didn't we learn anything from the 1980s when viruses propagated by floppy disks?