Searching for a hot news topic or buzzword can already lead an unsuspecting person to harmful malware. Recent articles are full of warnings about malware hidden in links that are supposedly about the World Cup or the Icelandic Volcano. Estimates have suggested that about 14 percent of traditional searches for trending news go to sites hosting malware.

As real-time search becomes more important, the problem of malware-related results could become much worse, according to a talk given yesterday by Dan Hubbard, CTO of Websense, at the Cloud Security Alliance Summit, which took place at the Black Hat security conference in Las Vegas. The event brought together speakers from government, industry, academia, and the underground. Hubbard outlined several ways that real-time search results are easy to poison.

Much of the problem stems from the nature of information provided in real time, Hubbard says. It's noisy, spammy, and not authoritative. So search engines have a difficult task ahead determining what links can be trusted.

The results are also easy to manipulate. Hubbard experimented with searches related to the recent Boston marathon. He found that he could get posts to the top of real-time search engine results by posting in anticipation of events. For example, he posted information about who had won before there was a winner, garnering a top spot on real-time results pages. He found that he could trick even Google by introducing typos that other users might be likely to make (such as "Botson" marathon). And, by posting images along with text, Hubbard found that he was able to rocket his posts to the top of results pages.

Hubbard says spammers could use social graphs to manipulate real-time search results as well. A botnet, for example, could create large numbers of interconnected Twitter accounts, creating a source of information that could seem authoritative. Hubbard also pointed to recent reports of spammers taking over the Twitter accounts of well-known users.

There may be big opportunities for spammers as location gets factored into the ranking of real-time results. Current location services trust where users say they are, he says. Location is also relatively easy to spoof. Spammers could add their links to real-time search ranks by seeming, for example, to tweet about the Icelandic volcano from Iceland, or about the Boston marathon from the finish line.

Hubbard plans to continue his investigation by looking at how spammers might be able to influence Facebook streams and search, and what they might be able to do with the popular location-based social network Foursquare.

Yesterday at the Plug In conference in San Jose, CA, technology company Ecotality and design firm Frog Design announced a new line of electric-vehicle chargers. The chargers, which will be rolled out in demonstration projects in 16 states with funding from the US Department of Energy, have a color touchscreen and are connected to the internet. A user can program the chargers to charge a vehicle by a certain time and when prices reach a certain level; the connectivity will also allow utilities to display messages and provide data to the charger about fluctuating electricity prices.

With its black and white color scheme and rounded edges, the Blink looks like it was designed by Apple. The cord-winding station below the touchscreen even resembles the clickwheel of a classic iPod. (Not surprising, since Frog famously created the look or "design language," called Snow White, used by Apple for its computers from 1984 to 1990.) Frog representatives explained that the chargers are meant to look friendly and approachable. They're also ready for co-branding--Starbucks or Best Buy might offer a free charge in their parking lot to get electric vehicle owners to spend money there, and could add their logo to the Blink on a skin. The company will offer a wall-mounted residential version and a free-standing version designed for parking lots.

Lee Slezak, a representative of the US Department of Energy vehicle technology program, and conference attendee, said Blink offers capabilities other chargers lack. "One thing we've been pushing for as we roll out charging infrastructure is to make sure it has the smallest possible impact on the grid."

Enabling communication between the utilities and the consumer, as the blink does, will help both: the utility can offer lower rates when demand is lower and users can program the charger to take advantage of this.

This video shows how the Blink system works:

Choosing a broadband provider is a little like shopping blind folded: you rarely know what speed connection you'll actually get until you've handed over your first month's subscription. Also, marketing material carefully uses the phrase "up to", so consumers tend to only know about the best case scenario speeds of different providers.

To address the problem, Ookla, the company behind Speedtest.net, has just released data that shows what speed different ISPs deliver. The company's NetIndex site already ranks cities, U.S. states, and countries by their average connection speeds. The new data comes from a questionnaire that appears after someone uses speedtest.net to test their connection. In the last 30 days or so, around 100,000 people have responded.

Scroll to the bottom of this page to see the ranking of all ISPs across the U.S. At the time of writing Comcast comes out top, followed by less well known providers Charter, Optimum Online, MidContinent Communications and Road Runner. You can drill down to see the list for individual states, for example Massachusetts, and cities.

"This is the kind of data that people haven't been able to see before," says Ookla co-founder Mike Apgar, also revealing plans to have speedtest.net tell you how your connection compares to the average in your state or local area. He's also working on a "value index" that compares ISPs based on the price you pay for each Mbps you get.

"It gets a little more interesting when we get into what people are paying," says Apgar. For example, preliminary data shows that the average monthly cost of broadband in the U.S. is $47.32, at a cost of $5.06 per Mbps. Comparing states is more interesting: Washington residents pay $3.89 per Mbps, those in California $4.24 and inhabitants of Idaho $8.80. "The ultimate vision is that we'll have a site where you can compare ISPs from across the globe," Apgar adds. Given South Korea's clear lead in the global speed stakes, 26 places ahead of the U.S., it's likely the country will also dominate that list.