You are reading the article Spywall Takes Top Security Honors updated in December 2023 on the website Katfastfood.com. We hope that the information we have shared is helpful to you. If you find the content interesting and meaningful, please share it with your friends and continue to follow and support us for the latest updates. Suggested January 2024 Spywall Takes Top Security Honors
Edging out its closest competitor, Trlokom, Inc.’s SpyWall took top honors in the Enterprise Security category of Datamation’s Product of the Year 2006 awards.
SpyWall, the newly anointed flagship product for the five-year-old company, outdistanced the second-place finisher, eSoft, Inc.’s ThreatWall. Digital Defense, Inc.’s Frontline V3.2 came in third, with eIQnetworks, Inc. coming in a close fourth with its Enterprise Security Analyzer. Rounding out the top five was Pointsec for PC 6.0 from Pointsec Mobile Technologies, Inc.
SpyWall is designed to protect client-side applications. This first version of the security product is focused on protecting the browser, but an upcoming version, expected late this year, will be designed to add in protection for email and instant messaging software, according to Jayant Shukla, founder of Trlokom, which is based in Monrovia, Calif.
”There are so many security companies out there doing the same things,” said Shukla, who adds that the young company is building on about 20 customers right now. ”There are maybe 70 companies trying for an anti-spyware solution. We said forget about spyware. Let’s focus on the attack vector, and that’s application access. You need protection against all those types of attacks.”
Shukla said they decided to focus on protecting the browser first because it’s such a highly targeted attack vector.
”Most attacks come in through the browser,” he added, citing a recent TrendMicro survey that showed 85 percent of attacks use the browser. ”It’s the big source of problems. We knew we needed to get to that first, and then move on to email and IM.”
And that was a good call, according to Joe Wilcox, a senior analyst for JupiterResearch.
While Wilcox says the application security space is heating up, he’s also surprised at how few companies are working in this area today.
”It’s hugely needed,” he adds. ”If you look at the trend over the last five years or so, as companies fortified the perimeter with firewalls and other security, the hackers moved on to the application layer. In the earlier days of application attacks, we saw the Outlook viruses, like Melissa. Now, the larger concern is what I call the big tunnel into every business, which is Port 80 — Web browser access… With businesses connected to the Internet and many applications directly connecting to the Internet, the risk profile increases.”
The network manager of a San Francisco-based investment real estate company says they started using SpyWall back when it was in beta to better battle these new risks to the client… and to the network.
The manager, who asked that he and his company not be named in this story, said he went with SpyWall — over LavaSoft’s Ad-Aware and Spybot by Safer-Networking Ltd. — because it gives him the ability to centrally manage the security on his client machines — inside and outside of the main office.
”I thought this looked better than all the bits and pieces we had been buying before,” he said. ”We want to help end users by setting up trusted websites and pushing updates out to everybody. I like a one-stop-shop kind of product.”
And the network manager says SpyWall is keeping the company’s desktops and laptops much cleaner than they used to be.
”Before we were cleaning up maybe four or five machines a week, and we got a lot of repeat customers… People would surf a website and we’d have to clean out spyware and whatever weird little things had been loaded on their machines,” he added. ”Since we installed SpyWall, it’s really dropped off a lot.
”It’s saving me a lot of time in terms of having to go out to these machines,” he says, noting that he’s looking forward to the upcoming version that will add email protection.
You're reading Spywall Takes Top Security Honors
Information security mistakes are costly, damaging, and all too prevalent. Given the repercussions of poor security strategies (see recent incidents from organizations like TJX, AOL and the VA), one is inclined to believe change agents are in place.
However, organizations continue to drive their security efforts based on fallacies and myths, and make seemingly avoidable mistakes when it comes to information security. I’ll present six common myths, in no particular order:
• Network Defenses will Protect your Kingdom
• Technology/Tools are the Panacea
• Only “Bad” People are Bad
• Security ROI is the Beacon
• Secure Software is Costly
• The Security Breach du Jour is the Most Pressing
1) Network Defenses Protect Your Kingdom
The problem isn’t our networks (which are pretty well protected, by the way). It’s the crappy software we write and put on the network.
There is no discipline or rigor to software engineering like there is in other engineering disciplines. I’m a mechanical engineer by trade with certifications that verify my expertise in this craft. There is no correlation in the software world and we, as organizations that build and buy software, aren’t demanding a change.
Network defenses, like firewalls and intrusion prevention systems, have a place in a multi-layered information security solution, but they can’t protect us from the majority of vulnerabilities – those in the application layer.
2) Technology/Tools are the Panacea
I love tools. I worked for a software testing tools vendor for more than five years. But I also recognize that tools alone don’t make people smarter, nor do they improve the process through which solutions are built. They simply make people and processes more efficient in jobs they are trained to do.
Tools don’t teach a surgeon how to operate. I didn’t become a better mechanical design engineer because I learned how to use AutoCAD; it just made me more efficient in the job I was already trained to do. That’s the problem. There is no training in the application development discipline and no rigor in holding teams accountable to maintaining secure infrastructures. Tools have their place in a complete information security workflow but they require people who know how to operate them to be effective.
3) Only “Bad” People are Bad
Causal hackers aren’t the real threat. Hackers actually help trip landmines that are waiting to be exploited.
The real threats are organized hackers (think terrorist cells or enemy states) who could cripple our infrastructure, utilities and communication systems. Real threats are insiders who already have access and know where the crown jewels are. Companies focus on hackers but that is the wrong assumption. And they always forget that it’s their poorly-written software that allows the hackers to exploit them in the first place. Fix the problem (bad software) and you mitigate the threats.
4) Security ROI is the Beacon
A recent Gartner survey noted that 25% of organizations are looking for a specific return on investment from information security investments. An additional 27% view it as a cost or risk avoidance investment, leaving only 48% of organizations that view security investments as a cost of doing business.
Until organizations let go of the desire to measure security ROI, they will never be satisfied with any investment therein. Your applications and data are liabilities, not assets. They are information security risks and liabilities that need to be mitigated, not exploited for ROI.
If companies thought about their applications as threats or liabilities instead of assets they’d treat them a lot differently, from conception through development and deployment. Think of security investment like an investment in term life insurance – you are mitigating risks associated with a liability, your mortality. We don’t die every year, but does that mean term life insurance is a bad investment?
5) Secure Software is Costly
Though it may add time to the up-front software development cycle, integrating security into each phase of the software development lifecycle (SDLC) saves tons of time and money in later phases.
Application security holes take a long time to troubleshoot, re-code and patch. Microsoft has some good case studies on this utilizing its Secure Development Lifecycle (SDL) internally on applications like SQL Server 2005. I realize they are biased in promoting that but the numbers don’t lie – SQL Server 2005 (which was built using SDL) has substantially fewer security bugs than either Oracle or MySQL. Check the CVE database for verification.
6) The Security Breach Du-Jour is the Most Pressing
This is a psychological problem more than anything. People react to the most recent scare.
For example, lost laptops from ING and Ernst & Young lead to organizations mandating hard drive encryption on all machines that leave the premises. A series of news articles on netbots result in heavy investments in IPS (intrusion prevention systems). This is a trend that is well-documented and a shame.
Organizations feel more at risk simply because they are aware of an incident that occurred at some other organization. The result is over-investment and investment in the wrong places because organizations try to mitigate a risk that they now perceive as real. The fact is that there are many more risks that are much more real and probably more damaging, but the recency trap has sprung. It happens not just in IT.
In 1967 Sweden changed from driving on the left side of the road to driving on the right. What happened? In the 12 months following, auto fatalities dropped by 35%. Not because the right side of the road is safer, but because there was a change and people felt more at risk. Twelve months later, auto fatalities were exactly where they were pre-1967. People forgot they were at risk and adjusted behavior. Classic.
Questions to Ask Yourself
If you made it to this point without a major panic attack, that’s good. There’s no doubt that security has been one of the biggest pains faced by the IT industry in the last few years. And it will continue on this painful path if you bury your head in the sand thinking it will go away. Ask yourself:
1) How much value will adding x security control bring to my organization? And how much risk will that control help me mitigate?
2) How do I know I’m improving on security? What do we measure and are we using the right metric?
3) Do I need to make a security investment in this area (the answer isn’t always yes)? And what are the activities that provide the largest security protection here?
4) When I buy or build “y” product, what is the security risk in deploying it and how does that risk vary from product to product?
5) How will tools help my team? And do I need to provide them training to complement the tools?
6) What activities should the IT or development team be doing to ensure secure data and applications? Are we thinking of security at each phase of the software development and management lifecycle?
7) Is my business really at risk in this area or do I just perceive that we are because of recent events?
Samsung have announced their new 1GHz mobile processor, the Samsung Hummingbird, based on the 45nm ARM Cortex A8 architecture and developed jointly with Intrinsity. The Hummingbird CPU promises not only high media and data crunching performance in mobile devices, but low power consumption and – thanks to some creative re-use of existing technology – relatively low chip prices.
Hummingbird comes with 32KB of both data and instruction cache, a variable-size L2 memory cache and the ARM NEON multimedia extension. With NEON, Hummingbird can promise hardware video encoding and decoding, 2D/3D graphics, audio/voice/speech processing and sound synthesis that’s more than twice as powerful as previous ARM-based chips.
Samsung are now working on SoC (System-on-Chip) implementations of the Hummingbird, which will likely be positioned to take on Qualcomm’s similarly 1GHz Snapdragon chipset. No word on how the two components compare in terms of pricing, however.
SAMSUNG AND INTRINSITY JOINTLY DEVELOP THE WORLD’S FASTEST ARM® CORTEX™-A8 PROCESSOR BASED MOBILE CORE IN 45 NANOMETER LOW POWER PROCESS
SEOUL, KOREA, AUSTIN, TEXAS, July 26, 2009 – Samsung and Intrinsity today jointly announced the industry’s fastest mobile processor core implementation of the dual-issue ARM® Cortex™-A8 processor architecture in 45 nanometer (nm) Low Power (LP), low leakage process technology. This Cortex-A8 implementation, code-named Hummingbird, delivers 2000DMIPS at 1GHz. The Hummingbird comes with 32KB each of data and instruction caches, an L2 Memory cache, the size of which can be customized, and an ARM® NEON™ multi-media extension. Performance and power consumption of the Hummingbird have been validated in silicon. SoC implementations using this core are under development.
A highly effective synthesis flow which creates static logic with optimal timing and power was employed to generate the gate-level view of the Hummingbird. With this flow, standard cell gates are placed to minimize wire delay and maximize speed. Highly automated Vt and cell selection flows choose the best gates for speed while balancing power. Finally, a high performance physical design integration flow which includes automated and optimized bus routing, driving, and re-buffering is used to generate the final design.
According to Bob Russo, Intrinsity CEO, “Not only is it the fastest available Cortex-A8 processor in an LP technology on the market, but we believe it has the lowest leakage and dynamic power consumption of any high-end mobile processor core out there. Mobile device end-users want smoother video, faster gaming, and a longer battery life. Meeting these conflicting demands typically means building a new processor implementation from scratch. That can take as long as two or more years and hundreds of engineers – a very expensive proposition. Intrinsity’s FastCore solution could be available in as quickly as four months at a fraction of the cost. Cycle behavior changes are not viable because they require that all software and test suites be largely re-designed and introduce an unacceptable high level of risk. Add another year or more to the development time for that. Intrinsity has solved this problem by applying a semi-custom design flow and Fast14 technology to enhance a great core and potentially double its performance.”
Intrinsity’s Cortex-A8 processor-based Fastcore embedded core is cycle-accurate and Boolean equivalent to the original Cortex-A8 RTL specification. While most ARM processor cores are implemented with synthesized static logic and compiled SRAMs, the Hummingbird achieves the exceptional 1GHz clock rate in Samsung’s 45nm LP process technology through the use of a semi-custom design flow which strategically applies Intrinsity’s proprietary Fast14 one-of-N domino logic (NDL) technology as macros in the timing-critical paths of the Cortex-A8 RTL core. NDL provides low latency conversion between domino logic and static logic which allows NDL to be seamlessly applied to a standard cell synthesized design. NDL provides gates which are 25 to 50 percent faster than static logic gates.
There is no such thing as perfect security in the computing world. There’s not even one “best” approach. Operating systems have to balance usability, user expectations, and simple operation with security concerns and do their best to make an appealing blend. Security is often the opposite of usability and flexibility, so finding the right balance is important to building a user base and maintaining longevity.
Different developers have different approaches to operating system security, from challengingly secure to problematically open. These distinctions often come down to philosophical choices expressed through security policies. You can understand how an OS sees itself, its purpose, and its users by examining how the OS handles security.Highest Security, Lowest Usability: Tails
Tails is an extreme take on operating system security. It’s likely the most secure operating system available to the public. However, it’s extremely difficult to use for general-purpose computing. Tails is a “live” operating system, meaning it can be run on a computer from a DVD or USB drive. Tails has no save state and must start from “zero” on each boot. This fresh start erases any traces of previous user activity or possibly malicious software. When paired with the built-in security programs found in Tails, it creates an extremely secure operating system.
The limitations of this strategy are immediately obvious. Such an operating system is all but unusable for most general purpose computing. So who is it for then? Users who, for whatever reason, require that level of security. You’d only be willing to suffer through this approach if you had an extremely good reason to deal with the downsides. If your personal or professional safety depends on high security, Tails is a good tool. Such strong security can enable hackers and ne’er-do-wells, but it’s also crucial for the safety of whistle-blowers, investigators, and journalists.High Usability and Security: iOS
Apple’s iOS offers high usability and high security but virtually no options for serious customization of the operating system. It’s a largely inflexible system. If you’re not happy with Apple’s design decisions, you had better hope they change it for you or consign yourself to a life of useless grumbling.
Apple often attracts criticism for its “walled garden” approach to software design on iOS, especially from users accustomed to greater freedom. This criticism is accurate, as any dispassionate user can admit. The choice undeniably restricts users and limits developer freedom, but it is not without its benefits. Designers leverage these restrictions to improve security and usability. When it’s hard to access system data or make changes to the system’s core functionality, less can go wrong, either accidentally or maliciously.
Take a recent example for illustration. Within the last month, some Android users discovered that their Facebook app had quietly hoovered up years of phone call metadata. iOS users, however, had no such problem. And it’s not thanks to the iOS users’ diligence: they’re just as lazy as everyone else. The iOS operating system simply prohibits such data collection.
Of course, this does limit the types of apps available on iOS, restricting user choice and limiting app developers. However, these limitations repay the user with fewer opportunities to break the system or decrease security. This choice represents a fundamental philosophical distinction in operating system security design when compared with more open systems like Windows and Android.Moderate Usability and Security: Windows
Windows attempts to strike a practical balance between security and usability, permitting users to make major changes to the operating system while still preventing serious attacks. It’s a delicate balance, and Windows walk its tightrope carefully. A misstep in either direction often means a bad user experience or security problems down the line.
Fortunately, the adoption of Windows-as-a-Service in Windows 10 means that Microsoft can make major updates to the OS over the course of its life. And, in a controversial move, they can also force sufficiently important updates on users whether they want them or not.
It hasn’t always been a smooth road. Windows has sometimes suffered security flaws and software vulnerabilities. The attack surface is immense, and near-universal adoption makes discovering attacks and zero-days well worth the trouble. But considering that the vast majority of computing devices in the world run Windows, it’s a clear indication of the philosophy’s popularity. Perfection is not essential to success. Windows has proven that good-enough security and reliable functionality is an acceptable compromise for most personal and corporate users.High Usability, High Security: macOS
Just like iOS, macOS offers an attractive combination of high usability and high security. However, users also get the major downside of iOS: limited user control. Apple tightly controls their software and hardware ecosystem, freeing them from the many security and support obligations that Microsoft labors under. As such, they have the freedom to create a highly usable and highly secure operating system, though there have been some embarrassing security black eyes in the most recent version of macOS. The system also benefits from some security through obscurity: with such a small segment of the desktop market, macOS doesn’t represent an appealing target for attackers.Variable Usability, Variable Security: Linux
Linux might be the most flexible operating system architecture around, meaning it’s hard to say for certain what kind of security or usability the operating system has. It’s not a monolithic entity like macOS or Windows but a common feature in countless distros, ranging wildly in quality, scattered across the world. Thus, to talk about “Linux security” is to paint with an extremely broad brush.
In general, the Linux kernel is secure, but it’s just the core around which you build your own distribution. It’s theoretically easy to add packages that compromise that security, creating flaws where none previously existed. It’s also easy to build an operating system that only you would ever want, offering a degree of customization and control that’s simply impossible on other platforms.
Working with the most popular distros, like Ubuntu and Debian, will limit exposure to security bugs, but it’s a problem that infects all free and open-source software. Free software simply gets less coding attention than paid software, which we all learned to our detriment in the Heartbleed OpenSSL bug. Similar issues could be lurking in other popular open-source utilities, and we might not know until its too late. Like many things in Linux, it’s up to the user to manage their own security, ensuring they have a combination of usability, flexibility, and security that they’re comfortable with.Moderate Usability, Low Security: Android
Android offers the user far more customization via flexibility. But as a trade-off, it’s far less secure than competing operating systems. This is almost entirely thanks to the distribution strategy rather than any inherent flaw or oversight in the operating system. Android isn’t “broken” or “bad,” but the way it exists in the market creates opportunities for exploitation.
The incredibly open system offers massive flexibility, so it’s cheap, widespread, and familiar to consumers. But from a security perspective, it’s a patchwork of vendor-specific implementations, slow-motion updates and near non-existent support from manufacturers after devices are sold.
Essentially, the only “true” Android experience comes from Google devices, but that represents an incredibly small segment of the market. Android in its purest stock form doesn’t have an inherent or design-based security problem. However, the way fragmentary and variable Android is implemented by vendors creates a potential minefield of security issues.Conclusion
Perfect security is an illusion. There is no “best” operating system or a “right” approach to security. It’s about finding a balance between what you need and what you want in an operating system. Different strokes for different folks, and different ways to solve the same problem. This is why diversity in the marketplace is so crucially important: sometimes there isn’t a “best” solution, and you want a solution to a problem that best fits your philosophy and needs.
In a broad analysis, Windows manages the most popular balance between usability, security, and flexibility. Users have a significant degree of freedom to customize and even break their systems, but usability and design could be better managed. The many inter-operating parts of the Windows operating system provides fertile ground for security holes and a high incentive for attackers to find those bugs before Microsoft. But with constant patches and updates, Microsoft has done good work staying ahead of the curve.
iOS represents a different but also successful model. The iPhone rules the high-end smartphone market, remaining an extremely popular device year after year with users of all stripes. The usability and security improvements that iOS’ user restrictions enable are apparently well worth it for many users, and the system is well-designed enough that the inflexibility of iOS is barely noticeable.
Image Credit: Jhallard
Alexander Fox is a tech and science writer based in Philadelphia, PA with one cat, three Macs and more USB cables than he could ever use.
Subscribe to our newsletter!
Our latest tutorials delivered straight to your inbox
Sign up for all newsletters.
The 2023 Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded to Syukuro Manabe, Klaus Hasselmann, and Giorgio Parisi for their contributions to how we understand complex physical systems, such Earth’s climate, as well as the phenomenon of climate change. Manabe and Hasselmann share one half of the award, and Parisi received the other half.
The universe’s systems of matter seem almost miraculously complex, and even more astonishing than their complexity is their apparent simplicity. Even something as banal as the weather report is an inestimably intricate part of a series of predictions based on millions of years’ worth of patterns. Manabe, Hasselmann, and Parisi sorted through the chaos of a constantly evolving environment to find reliable patterns, separating the signal from the noise, and finding structure within the randomness from the atomic level to the planetary. Manabe and Hasselmann won for their work on physical modeling of Earth’s climate and reliably predicting global warming; Parisi discovered of the hidden patterns in disordered, complex systems that make it possible to describe seemingly random phenomena through these rules.
Syukuro Manabe, a meteorologist and climatologist at Princeton University, showed how higher concentrations of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere lead to increased temperatures of the Earth’s surface. In 1960, he spearheaded physical climate models, becoming the first person to probe the interaction between radiation balance (radiation coming into versus off of the planet) and the vertical movement of air masses within the atmosphere. Working with a simplified model, Manabe found that carbon dioxide levels increased global surface temperature by over 2°C, while oxygen and nitrogen had virtually no effects on it.
Syukuro Manabe’s climate model.
This model verified that carbon dioxide, as opposed to solar radiation, caused this surface temperature increase—temperatures close to the ground rose while atmospheric temperatures dropped. Were this change due to solar radiation, the entire atmosphere should warm simultaneously. From this insight, Manabe moved on to a groundbreaking three-dimensional model, which he published in 1975.
[Related: Nobel Prize awarded to researchers who parsed how we feel temperature and touch]
While Manabe was focusing on carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, Hasselmann, a professor at the Max Planck Institute for Meteorology, fixed his gaze on climate and weather. Weather fluctuates wildly every day, whereas climate is the average of weather conditions. Because weather varies so quickly, it’s difficult to calculate. About ten years after Manabe, Hasselmann created a stochastic weather model, meaning a model that accounts for chance. But he went a step further—he also developed methods to account for human impact on the climate. Those methods have allowed researchers to link climate, weather, and human intervention into complex climate models.
About 1980, Giorgio Parisi, a theoretical physicist at Rome’s Sapienza University, demonstrated a greater principle underlying systems like the climate, showing that the randomness of some phenomena belie a web of hidden rules. Parisi explored the nature of a particular kind of matter called spin glass. Spin glass is an alloy, a composite metal made of two or more metal elements. For example, one type of spin glass is iron atoms randomly mixed into a grid of copper atoms. These few iron atoms alter the material’s overall magnetic properties. Each atom behaves like a magnet, or spin, and usually all the spins point in the same direction. But in spin glass, the spin is frustrated, which means some spin pairs want to point in one direction while other pairs want to point in the opposite direction. In his book, Parisi likens this atomic behavior to a Shakespeare tragedy. Think of Romeo and Juliet: While they love one other, each receives opposing signals from their family to despise the other. Their attraction is stymied by family pulling them in different directions.
Spin glass is the basis for many complex models, and in 1979 Parisi applied something called a replica trick to a spin glass model problem. A replica trick is a mathematical technique that processes many replicas of a system at once, which had been impossible for physics. Parisi found a clandestine structure in the replicas and used it to solve a spin glass problem. His work on spin glass altered not only physics but also mathematics, biology, neuroscience, and machine learning. This research also relates back to the climate system.
The Nobel Prizes are awarded each year in October in a number of categories; the main ones in science are medicine and physiology, physics, and chemistry. Last year’s prize in physics went to Roger Penrose for his discovery that black hole formation is a robust prediction of the general theory of relativity, and to Reinhard Genzel and Andrea Ghez for the discovery of a supermassive compact object at the center of our galaxy.
Originally released as an arcade machine way back in 1987, Sega’s high-adrenaline jet fighter action, After Burner Climax, has made a jump to the iPhone and iPad (it’s also coming soon to Android). The game puts you in the cockpit of the F-14D Super Tomcat, F-15E Strike Eagle or F/A-18E Super Hornet, each customizable with four paint jobs (standard paint, camouflage, special paint and low visibility).
Load your aircraft with a bunch of high-tech weapons, take off into the skies and barrel through twenty different landscapes – like volcanoes, jungles, ice caps and more. Of course, the game’s really just an excuse for a bunch of orange explosions and total mayhem.
Nevertheless, fans of some heart-pounding action (gee, I sound like a PR bunny) should consider giving After Burner Climax a try…
As a nice bonus, you can enjoy Retina action on a big screen TV as After Burner Climax supports both HDMI and AirPlay video.
The classic arcade game After Burner has now returned for a new generation of gamers. After Burner Climax is fast and frantic action, putting you in the cockpit of the world’s fastest fighter plane. Dodge planes, rockets and bullets while trying to target multiple on-screen enemy aircraft.
Built for all skill levels, everyone will be able to take to the air and blaze through a branching storyline and over 20 stages. Unlock achievements along the way to unlock exclusive Avatar Awards using your experience and expertise.
And your full features list:
Select your aircraft from the F-14D Super Tomcat by Northrop Grumman to the F-15E Strike Eagle and F/A-18E Super Hornet by Boeing. Personalize your plane with a selection of 4 different paint jobs including: standard paint, camouflage, special paint and Low Visibility
Play through each stage at blazing speed with your personalized fighter aircraft.
Keep your head under pressure with limited time to make adrenaline-fuelled decisions, and experience different paths through the game based on
Build up your skill in Training Mode and then take flight in Arcade mode. Play through Score Attack to see how you rank on the Online Leaderboards.
Enjoy the exhilarating flight in overwhelmingly superior condition and take down multiple enemies at a time.
When your Climax Gauge is full, time will slow down and your lock-on cursor will expand. This is your chance to lock on to enemies en masse and take them all down at once!
Blast away close range enemies with the gun with access to unlimited ammo. Shoot missiles that lock on to enemy aircraft.
Your skills will be tested to unlock exclusive Avatar Awards that are made available to the expert player.
And a screenie.
If you don’t mind pretty basic and simple controls, raw arcade feel and the asking price of three bucks, we’ll forgive you for killing time with a mindless shooter that blazes fast.
Yes, it’s a universal binary supporting all form factor iDevices natively.
While it’s been a long time since I played a quality jet fighter shooter, I’m gonna stick with Sky Gamblers: Air Supremacy.
As you might have figured out, I’m not a big fan of the 1980-style arcade shooters.
Update the detailed information about Spywall Takes Top Security Honors on the Katfastfood.com website. We hope the article's content will meet your needs, and we will regularly update the information to provide you with the fastest and most accurate information. Have a great day!