WELCOME TO FIXTUNE

A high-performance version of Intel's future Broadwell chip will squeeze in 18 cores -- Intel's highest core count to date -- according to a report. Meanwhile, another report points to future Broadwell chips that could populate tablets.

Vr-zone reported this week that a future 18-core Broadwell-EP or EX Xeon chip is planned that is based on Intel's upcoming 14-nanometer production process.

"Intel will not...speed up the cores, but simply pile up more of them on each [chip] die," said Vr-zone, which published a slide showing a purported Intel roadmap.

That multi-core chip wouldn't arrive until 2015, according to Vr-zone.

Intel is also planning 8- to 10-core high-performance desktop and workstation processors, Vr-zone said.

The first Broadwell silicon is expected in the first half of next year. Broadwell follows the current Haswell generation of processors. Intel core counts now top out at 12.

More processor cores can offer better performance if the software can take advantage of the extra cores.

And that's not all Intel has planned for Broadwell. CPU World is reporting that at the other end of processor spectrum, future power-sipping Broadwell chips could have thermal envelopes as low as 4.5 watts.

That would make Broadwell an easy fit for tablets and 2-in-1s -- a market that Intel is paying a lot of attention to these days.

That's why if you own a smartphone and bravely brandish it on the street or the train, it's essential that you take every step necessary to protect your data from thieves, and to track and manage your smartphone once it's gone. In this feature, I've described the essential security features available for each smartphone operating system and the major US carriers. Also, read Jessica's Dolcourt's smart tips for safe phone use in public. The wireless industry is taking some steps to confront phone theft like the creation of a national phone "blacklist," but that's as far as it's willing to go for now. Some law enforcement agencies, particularly those in San Francisco and New York state, want a "kill switch" that would essentially brick a phone, but carriers and OEMs are balking at that idea. I'll discuss both issues in more detail below.

Before I begin
First, there are a few things that you should know. In the first section, I've divided each operating system into two parts: the basic security features that come on the smartphones for preventing data theft that use an OS, and the more sophisticated app-based services available for tracking and wiping a device. Note also, I purposely did not include any third-party security apps. Though such titles exist, and many will do the job quite well, my intent is to focus on the default solutions that are either already on a handset, or officially endorsed by an OS provider.

Also, keep in mind that no security feature is completely foolproof. A sophisticated thief with the right equipment may be able to bypass any security measure. What's more, there's always the chance that a thief is stealing your phone just for parts, and has no intention of reusing it. In that case, a password isn't going to stop him from just taking it apart.

Lock screen features
This is important. iOS can give you access to some features without entering your lock code. Though sensitive personal information is not accessible, you can use some functions of Siri, such as placing a voice call or sending a text message, as well as reply to a missed call with a canned text message. Though you might find those shortcuts convenient, your handset will be more secure if you turn them off. Go to Settings > General > Passcode Lock.

Once your phone has been stolen, the first step is to sign on to iCloud.com or use the free Find My iPhone app on another iOS device. Once in, you'll be able to find your device on an Apple map, but only if it is connected to a cellular or public Wi-Fi network (both secure and not). If the phone is connected just to a hidden Wi-Fi network (that is, one that does not appear in your handset's list of available networks), you may not be able to track it. Other restrictions also apply, but I'll get to those later.

After locating your phone and clicking on the icon, you can do a number of things. The first is to make the phone make play a sound at full volume for 2 minutes (even if it's in silent mode). As this step is more useful if you just happen to lose your phone in your sofa cushions, I'd advise not using it if you're certain that your handset is stolen. It just won't do a lot of good except annoy a thief. You also can erase your handset completely, but this step is rather premature. Instead, first try activating Lost Mode as soon as you as you can. Not only does it give you more options for controlling your phone, it also adds a stricter level of security.

Lost Mode
Lost Mode does a couple of things, the first of which is give you more features for controlling your device. To begin, if you haven't yet secured your device with a passcode (and, really, there's no reason why you shouldn't), you'll be able to select a four-digit simple passcode and lock the screen remotely. At the very least, that will prevent all but the most sophisticated thieves from accessing your personal information. Remember, though, that to make your phone as secure as possible, you should have already deactivated lock screen access to the features I mentioned previously.

The next step is to send a custom message to your handset's lock screen that can't be erased. You can write whatever you want, from your name or phone number, to a plea to contact you, to a more colorful message telling thieves what you really think of them. The latter, however, probably isn't the wisest course of action.

Lost Mode also lets you see a history of your phone's location over the last 24 hours with points displayed as pins on the aforementioned map. Finally, if all hope is gone, you can erase your device completely. Once you erase it, you'll lose the ability to track it further, but your lock code and onscreen message will remain.

Comparing Security features by OS

Activation Lock
Lost Mode also plays a role in Activation Lock, which is a new feature added in iOS 7. Built after Apple users rightfully complained that Find My iPhone wasn't comprehensive enough, Activation Lock tries to close the loop by preventing a thief from reusing your device after you've accepted that it's gone for good.

Running in the background from the moment you turn on Find My iPhone, Activation Lock pairs your Apple ID and password with the serial number of your handset in Apple's servers. Your ID and password are then required before anyone can turn off Find My iPhone on your handset, attempt to erase any data (that's assuming they aren't stopped by your password), reactivate your phone under a different account, or claim a new phone under your warranty. Activation Lock also remains in place if a thief tries to swap out your SIM card. If you happen to get your phone back and can't remember your password, you can retrieve it by calling Apple support and properly identifying yourself.

An outcry of disappointment greeted Google when people found out that the hidden App Ops feature was yanked from Android KitKat last week, and it's going to be a long time before you see it again.

Google said at the time that it removed the feature because its experimental nature could break apps, a statement that was greeted with skepticism.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation's Peter Eckersley wrote, "The fact that [Android users] can not turn off app permissions is a Stygian hole in the Android security model, and a billion people's data is being sucked through."

"I think many consumers would love to use certain apps, but limit [those apps'] access to certain pieces of information," said Jeremy Linden, a security product manager at Lookout Mobile Security. "More granular access to permissions is a better take."

However, it's not going to happen. At least, not before Android 5 at the earliest, and possibly not before Android 6.

Permissions toggle breaks apps
Google would face two major problems if it had kept App Ops in KitKat. The first is that the company is probably right about how a per-permission toggle could prevent apps from functioning properly.

"Android developers have developed their apps with a certain paradigm: you either get all the permissions or you don't get the app," Linden explained. "So many apps developers have been building for either all or nothing, [the App Ops] functionality in its present state would break many apps."

Imagine you have a movie theater app that tells you what films are playing nearby. It wants to access your GPS, but you're only interested in its showtimes feature. If you disable the GPS permission, the failure of the location request might break the app.

Eventually, Linden explained, "the developer could code the app to gracefully fail, but the app ops feature didn't allow that."

Not being ready for "prime time" but allowing the feature to stand, he said, would result in Android users would get error messages they couldn't understand.

And that leads to Google's second problem when introducing App Ops, or something similar: its user base.

While Google isn't talking specific user numbers, there have been more than 1 billion Android device activations, and somewhere around 1.5 million new Android devices get activated every day. Google simply, and arguably, quite logically, doesn't want to risk introducing a feature that will break phones for new or old users.

"Google's covering for the casual user," said CyanogenMod's Abhisek Devkota, who heads up the custom ROM's moderation and community team.

CyanogenMod is the most popular third-party remix of Android, with more than 10 million users. That's not many compared to Android itself, but for an alternative version of Android with a complex installation process, 10 million is an impressive accomplishment.

And because they have fewer users to worry about, they can make changes to the Android code faster than Google can.

Permissions toggle comes easier to third parties
If the issue is important to you, you might be aware of the fact that CyanogenMod has implemented the exact feature that Google has just pulled. Why is CyanogenMod able to pull it off, when Google can't?

Part of the answer lies in the aforementioned user base. Google can't push out a new feature that would potentially break most if not all apps.

"Most users aren't comfortable knowing what all the permissions are that an app can handle," Devkota said.

CyanogenMod recently updated its Privacy Guard feature to include the App Ops functionality, but even then, Devkota noted that it blocks only a few kinds of permissions such as contact list access and location list access.

CyanogenMod circumvented the problem of having a disabled permission breaking an app by telling the user that a feature has been blocked with a persistent notification in the app. Still, there remains work to be done in CyanogenMod's implementation of the feature.

"In an ideal world, you could control app features on a per-app, per permission basis," Devkota said. "I don't think we've seen the end of it."

What Google must do to resurrect App Ops
Google left the App Ops framework in Android 4.4.2, an indication that the company is not sticking its head in the sand.

"Seeing it somewhere in the operating system means we're probably going to see it again at some point," said Devkota.

The feature is a major one, and its impact on developers shouldn't be underestimated. Given that, if and when the feature comes back, it'll probably be in the next major-point update to Android -- or the update after that.

"The vast majority of this is not a simple coding challenge. We are happy that Google choose to be conservative in this respect, as Android app developers," Linden said.

He estimated that only 5 percent of the work would be the effort to get the new permissioning model to function. The rest of the effort would have to be devoted to figuring out how to migrate older app to work with the new permissions scheme.

"It would be the largest change in modern Android history," he said.

Imagine going about your daily life and then one day receiving photos of yourself from inside your home. Sound spooky? Well, this really happened to a woman named Cassidy Wolf, according to the Washington Post. And, to make matters worse, she was nude in the photos.

How did this happen?

Apparently, there's a way for hackers to spy on people via their iSight webcams in older Apple MacBooks. Typically, when the camera is on a little light is also set off. But, in a newly discovered workaround, this light can be deactivated -- meaning unsuspecting victims have no clue they're being watched.

The Washington Post revealed this new research by Johns Hopkins computer scientist Stephen Checkoway, which shows how people can be spied on with MacBooks and iMacs released before 2008. Using proof-of-concept software, called Remote Administration Tool or RAT, Checkoway was able to reprogram the iSight camera's micro-controller chip so that the light doesn't turn on.

While it could be feasible to do this trick on newer Apple computers or laptops by other brands, it hasn't yet been proven possible.

In the case of Wolf, who was Miss Teen USA, the person spying on her was her high school classmate Jared Abrahams. The FBI was able to nab Abrahams, who pleaded guilty to extortion in October.

In another report by the Washington Post, the former assistant director of the FBI's Operational Technology Division Marcus Thomas said the FBI has been activating computer cameras without turning on the warning lights for years.

This is not the first time someone has been remotely spied on with a webcam, but it is the first known time that it's been done without the warning light being triggered.

Consumers who shopped at a Target store between November 27 and December 15 should check their credit card statements for any unusual activity.

On Thursday, the retail chain acknowledged that a recent hack obtained the names, credit or debit card numbers, expiration dates, and three-digit security codes of certain store customerswho purchased items over the past few weeks. Around 40 million credit and debit card accounts may have been affected by the attack.

The issue that let the hacker gain access to customer data has been identified and resolved, according to Target. The company said that it's working with law enforcement officials to track down those responsible for the attack and has hired a third-party forensic team to investigate the incident.

In an FAQ to customers potentially affected, Target explained that the data breach affects only those who made purchases at a Target store in the US between November 27 and December 15. Those who bought items through Target's Web site or at a retail store in Canada are safe, according to the company. Target REDcard holders who suspect a fraudulent charge on their card should contact Target; other customers should call their bank, Target advised.

The hack comes at an especially bad time as retailers like Target count heavily on holiday sales. In an attempt to calm concerned customers, the company said that people can continue to use their credit and debit cards to shop at Target.

"Target's first priority is preserving the trust of our guests and we have moved swiftly to address this issue, so guests can shop with confidence," Target chairman and CEO Gregg Steinhafel said in a statement. "We regret any inconvenience this may cause. We take this matter very seriously and are working with law enforcement to bring those responsible to justice."

In September, the Korean consumer electronics giant unveiled the Galaxy Gear, a smartwatch that connects to a user's smartphone or tablet to provide alerts, take photos, make calls, and access certain apps. For Samsung, the device is more than just another gadget; it also marks an important shift in the company's position in technology: long known as a "fast follower" that's able to pick up, emulate, and even improve upon existing industry trends, it is now cutting its own path with the unproven watch.

So Samsung beat out Apple, which is rumored to be launching an iWatch sometime next year. But the early response has been tepid. Tech reviewers, including CNET, have criticized Gear for its high price tag, weak battery life, wonky voice command feature, and limited compatibility with other devices. (It only works with certain Samsung phones andtablets.) Samsung said it shipped 800,000 Gears to retail partners in the first two months the device was on the market, but no one is saying how many have actually been purchased by consumers.

The company, however, believes the segment can become a huge business, and it's already working on future devices.

"I am very confident," Young-hee Lee, Samsung's head of mobile marketing, told CNET shortly after the Galaxy Gear launched. "It's a matter of time before all people are wearing smart devices and living very intuitively and conveniently. Five years ago, our smart device wasn't in the middle of our life. Now, look at [us]."

Here's what Samsung can do to make sure those new products are more popular with buyers:

Figure out the "wow factor": Gear is a sleek, eye-catching device that allows users to do some interesting things, such as take photos with the touch of a button on the Gear band. However, what the device really lacks is a "wow factor" or something that makes it a must-have gadget. It's unclear what that could be for Gear, whether it's a hardware feature, service, or other item. But that's something that Samsung needs to figure out if it wants people to start lining up for its devices.

Make Gear work with more phones: Samsung has been trying to build an ecosystem much like those of Apple and Google. That means offering devices, software, and services that make customers loyal to, and even lock them into, Samsung's products. The problem for Samsung, however, is that it doesn't control its software or services. Google does. Using Gear as a way to keep customers in its world is shaky at best, at least until Samsung controls all pieces of that world.

For the time being, Samsung should make Gear work with as many devices as possible. That includes the iPhone and other Android devices. Maybe even BlackBerrys and Windows Phones(although it can't be blamed for ignoring those last two). The wider compatibility could help Samsung win over more users at a time when wearable tech remains a niche category. The field is wide open with the iWatch still just a rumor, and only a handful of other viable smartwatch competitors.

Samsung doesn't have to go completely open (and it won't); it could keep certain features exclusive to its own smartphones and tablets, which would give users a reason to also buy aGalaxy S4 or Note 3. But making Gear work with more devices, right away, can only help.

More apps, please: Samsung can do all it wants to improve the hardware, but without developer support, the Gear is essentially a bulky, overpriced timepiece. The company needs to build up the community of developers willing to work with its smartwatch, enabling the creation of more apps and services.

Sure, there are notifications, but consumers will want more advanced bells and whistles to justify the expense of the device. How about a heart rate monitor? Or apps that track where you run, and for how long?

The possibilities for wearable services are almost limitless, but Samsung's still figuring out this part of its devices.

As CNET noted recently, the reason Gear doesn't have more apps right now is because the app store is still invite-only for developers. Samsung wants all Gear apps to provide a good experience for users, so it's closely controlling the development process.

However, opening Gear up to more developers could result in apps Samsung had never considered. One of those products could turn out to be that wow factor Samsung really needs. If Samsung really wants to create its own ecosystem, it will have to build its developer relationships. Gear is a good place to start.

Drop the price: At $300, Galaxy Gear sure isn't an impulse buy. The steep price tag puts the device in line with smartphones, tablets, and even some PCs, and makes it tough for many consumers to afford. Other smartwatches on the market retail for much less, such as thePebble at $150 and the Sony SmartWatch 2 at $200. CNET calls the Pebble "the best smartwatch deal around." By cutting $100 to $200 off the Gear price, Samsung immediately