濮阳东方医院男科治病怎么样(濮阳东方医院男科看病好吗) (今日更新中)

The Trump administration alleged Friday that Iranian government-linked hackers broke into the accounts of roughly 8,000 professors at hundreds of US and foreign universities, as well as private companies and government entities, to steal massive amounts of data and intellectual property.The indictment unveiled by the Department of Justice on Friday directly links the individuals charged with the hacks to the Iranian government, saying the perpetrators were working for Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and other government clients.Along with the charges, the Treasury Department designated the nine Iranians and the company they worked for, the Mabna Institute, for sanctions.The move from the Justice Department and Treasury follows other US efforts to indict foreign government-linked cyberattackers, including special counsel Robert Mueller's indictment of Russian operatives for meddling in the 2016 US election, and the Obama administration's indictment of Chinese military members for the government-sponsored hacking of US companies.It also comes at a time of tension with Iran, long an adversary of the US. As President Donald Trump reshuffles his national security and diplomacy team, including firing Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and national security adviser H.R. McMaster, experts speculate Trump may be laying the groundwork to pull out of the Iran nuclear deal that the Obama administration negotiated, though Iran's cyber efforts were not part of that deal.According to the charges, which include conspiracy to commit computer intrusions, wire fraud, unauthorized access of a computer and aggravated identity theft and could carry a maximum sentence of upwards of four decades in prison, the nine alleged hackers carried out a sophisticated worldwide campaign since at least 2013 to pull off their cyberheist of more than 30 terabytes of academic data and other sensitive information.The indictment alleges the Mabna Institute targeted more than 100,000 professors worldwide and succeeded in compromising 8,000 of them, spread across 144 US-based universities and 176 foreign universities. In their crosshairs were various types of intellectual property, including academic journals, dissertations and electronic books.To break into the accounts, the sophisticated campaign started by studying each target in a reconnaissance phase, then using that information to send specialized emails to the targets that appeared to come from other university professors expressing interest in a recently published work, with links to other research that were actually links to malicious websites that would mimic the professor's login page and steal his or her login information and use it to access their accounts.The hackers also allegedly broke into the accounts of employees of US government and non-governmental entities, including the Department of Labor, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the states of Hawaii and Indiana, Indiana's Department of Education, the United Nations, and the United Nations Children's Fund. Once inside, the hackers allegedly stole the entire email inbox.Other victims included employees of 36 US-based companies and 11 companies outside the US in a wide range of industries, including academic publishers, media and entertainment entities, a law firm, tech companies, and consulting and marketing firms.The tactic for the private-sector and governmental hacks was much less sophisticated, according to the indictment. The hackers allegedly used "password spraying": They collected email addresses they could find on the internet and then simply tried common passwords on those accounts, stealing email inboxes if they managed to get in.It is unlikely that any of the individuals named in the indictment will ever see the inside of a US jail or courtroom. It is also unlikely that foreign governments without extradition treaties with the US would give up their citizens to stand trial, and once the indictment is unsealed, the individuals named in it are unlikely to travel to countries that could extradite them to the US.Still, federal prosecutors hope that by exposing the hacking operations, they can deter the behavior and make clear their ability to trace it back to its source.  4260

The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to weigh in on the battle over pension reform in the city of San Diego. The decision leaves in place a California Supreme Court decision from last year that called pension reform into question and required a lower court to come up with a remedy. It could end up costing the city billions. In 2012, San Diego voters approved Proposition B with 65 percent in-favor. The measure ended pensions for nearly all new city hires, instead switching them to 401(k) type plans. Around the time, the city faced a billion pension liability, comprising 20 percent of the budget. "It is saving us, literally, hundreds of millions of dollars," Mayor Kevin Faulconer said Monday. "That's why it's important, so we can invest dollars back into neighborhoods."The city, however, is now on the legal defensive. Back in 2012, then-mayor Jerry Sanders campaigned on behalf of the measure. Labor unions argued Sanders' involvement required the city to meet and confer with unions before changing their terms of employment. The city argued that Sanders was exercising his First Amendment right to endorse the measure, which got to the ballot via a citizens initiative. The state Public Employee Retirement Board sided with the unions. So did the California Supreme Court, which last year ordered lower courts to decide a remedy. "There is not even a breath of a suggestion in this case that any public officials First Amendment rights have been violated," said Ann Smith, the attorney representing the labor unions. In a statement, Sanders, who now heads the San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce, called the Supreme Court's decision disappointing but not unexpected. Smith said a lower court decision could make a decision within 30 days. It could impact as many as 4,000 city employees. 1813

The student-athletes have been working too hard for their season to be cancelled. #WeWantToPlay https://t.co/lI3CCKZ4ID— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 10, 2020 179

The St. Louis Police Department is investigating one of their own after he issued a ticket to a man who honked at him.According to an interview in the Riverfront Times, Scott Smith was on his way back to work when he honked at a car stopped at a green light. Video shot by the driver and given to the RFT shows a very tense interaction.The car was an unmarked police car. When pulled over, Smith says "seriously?"The officer than replies "Seriously, is your horn stuck?" to which Smith replies "Is your brake stuck?"That's when the officer cusses at the driver asking again "Is your f-ing horn stuck?"He demands to see his driver's license.Smith says he will, but asks for what."I'll tell you what, you can either show your driver's license or you'll get a ticket and I'll tow your car and lock you up," said the officer.Once again Smith asks why he's been pulled over and the officer says it is for a traffic violation."For honking at someone who's stopped at a green light?" Smith asks. He then calls the situation "f-ing ridiculous." "Well you know what? Maybe you shouldn't be a f-ing a-hole," the officer responds.The officer issued the driver a ticket, but the city counselor's office reportedly will not prosecute it, saying they do not believe it should be pursued."The Department has launched an Internal Affairs investigation into the incident you are inquiring about. At this point, it would be premature for the Department to comment on an ongoing investigation before it concludes," a St. Louis Police spokesperson said.  1557

The State of Utah sent face masks showing a handgun and controversial political image to a Salt Lake City family.The free masks are part of the “A Mask For Every Utahn” campaign, where federal COVID-19 money purchased more than two million masks to stop the spread of the virus.“I was just shocked,” said Chrstine Passey-Spencer outside her Rose Park home.Two masks delivered to the family show an American flag with a handgun printed across them with “Don't Tread on Me” written below a coiled rattlesnake.“I think the thing that bothered me most is that I knew my tax dollars paid for this and this is very politically charged speech,” Passey-Spencer said.The “Don't Tread on Me” image stems from the Revolutionary War but has become controversial in recent years. The Gadsden Flag has been used by the Tea Party, anti-gun control activists and white supremacists.In 2016, it was deemed to have “racially-tinged” messaging in some contexts by the federal government.More recently, the image has been used by people believing COVID-19 health restrictions take away their constitutional rights.“We hope this is an isolated incident that we just missed these couple of masks,” said Governor’s Office of Economic Development’s Ben Hart, who oversees the state’s mask program.Since April, the state purchased millions of masks from local and international manufacturers.Hart admits about 100 of the “Don't Tread on Me” masks were included in a shipment last month. Hart says the staff deemed them “inappropriate” and attempted to set all of them aside.“We will not be using taxpayer dollars to pay for these masks. We will be working with the manufacturer and ensuring we do not pay for them,” said Hart.The governor’s office replaced the masks for Passey-Spencer on Tuesday.KSTU's Hailey Higgins first reported this story. 1828

来源：资阳报