Google Chrome is Close to Becoming #2 Worldwide

One of the Internet statistics companies revealed that Google’s Chrome browser is very close to the point of killing off Firefox as the number 2 most popular browser worldwide.

StatCounter is engaged in tracking browser usage with the help of different analytics instruments offered by the service to websites. The statistics firm recently claimed that Google Chrome is about to pass Firefox to take the place number 2 behind Microsoft's Internet Explorer (IE) in two months.

The global average user share of Chrome for the past month was 23.6%, while Firefox boasted 26.8% and Internet Explorer was at 41.7%. The statistics company pointed out that the rise of Google Chrome had been dramatic. Indeed, the browser has gained 8 percentage points since the start of this year, which was almost 50% increase. But this is not the most surprising in the statistics: the matter is that the Chrome growth turned out to be at the expense of Firefox and Internet Explorer that have both dropped 4 percentage points.

These numbers are not exactly what the Internet industry considers significant. In addition, a company like StatCounter can’t be regarded as the universally acknowledged standard for Internet browser use. Instead, many industry experts prefer using Net Applications numbers. Earlier in 2011, this company predicted that Google Chrome could have a 17.8% share by the end of this year, short of Firefox’s forecasted 22.3%. However, if the pace of change continues, Google Chrome should pass Firefox on Net Applications’ chart by the middle of next year.

Although these numbers are not that shocking as those of StatCounter, they still indicate that Google Chrome is rapidly developing and growing faster than many of us could ever expect. In other words, if Firefox and Internet Explorer don’t take quick action, it may end worse for them.

Read More

How to Make Mobile Communication Safe

In our days people rely on mobile devices to access the web, look for different information and keep in touch with family and friends. That’s why it is so important to know how to behave online, how to manage your Internet reputations and how to put your personal safety on the first place when communicating on a mobile device.

First of all, think twice before sharing a thought or a picture. Think about your colleagues, grandmother, or teacher receiving them. Are you sure that what you’re sharing is suitable for anyone to see? Then it is highly recommended to protect your personal data. So, when you send something like emails, messages, pictures or instant messages to someone who isn’t a trusted friend or a member of your family, never disclose any personal data that may be used either to figure out your physical location or to exploit you.

It is also recommended to control negativity and think twice about who deserves to communicate with and who doesn’t. A number of Internet services allow you to block visitors. In case you have received any abusive or harassing messages on the Internet, you should report the abuse where and when you saw it.

Another advice is to use filters. For example, a few browsers have filters that help keep inappropriate material out of your search results. Although there are no filters in the world that are able to guarantee you 100% removal of unwanted content, they can still make a great difference to keeping inappropriate material out of your search results.
When it comes to downloading things, most of the troubles with security begin. Educated netizens will never download software from unknown and unchecked sources. If you download applications from 3rd parties, you should make sure they are only from developers you trust. Before clicking “I agree” and installing, read their terms of service and privacy policies carefully in order to fully understand what permissions you are giving the developers when downloading their software.

Read More

Norton Overestimated Cyber Crime Figures

Norton, the consumer division of Symantec, was noticed to overestimate some online security figures. For example, for the last month the net saw the stories that claimed digital crimes costs society $388 billion per year. These figures are tagged onto to stories about cyber crimes.

These figures can be found in a Norton survey report asking around 20,000 people in two dozen countries about their experience with digital crime. The survey asked the respondents to evaluate both direct and indirect losses they think were caused by cyber crime.

Norton concluded that punters lost $114 billion per year, including consumer losses that were reimbursed – the most widespread case of such kind of crime is credit card fraud. However, the company seemed to fudge things a little: for example, it decided that online harassment was also a cyber crime, as well as being approached on the Internet by sexual predators. Moreover, the term “fraud” was defined so widely that it would have covered all credit card fraud, as the word “online” can’t even be found in the definition.

Nevertheless, this wasn’t enough for Norton, who firmly decided to make the statistics appear worse by calculating how much the cyber crime experiences in question were worth including “time lost”. And this last figure alone more than doubled the direct losses, as it was calculated to be $274 billion.

The media couldn’t miss the fact that even with the faulty reasoning something strange is happening with the numbers. Norton took the UN figures for the trade in heroin, cocaine and marijuana, reasoning that it was worth $411 billion a year. Meanwhile, if you add the $114 billion for direct Internet crime losses to the $274 billion for “time lost”, you’ll end up with a figure pretty close to the drug sales! In other words, Norton claimed that online crime is close to all global drug trafficking. The company is therefore boosting figures with “time lost” money, which in reality never existed, thus meaning that cyber crime is as bad as an industry based on real money!

Moreover, the experts found out that Norton made a press release two years ago, claiming that online crime eclipsed the global drug trade, and it seems that this time it reiterates the same, simply trying to back it up with numbers. As for the company itself, Norton explained that discrepancies can be explained by huge amount of unreported crime. At the same time, they insist that the company is confident it provides a valid representation of the current state of consumer online crime.

Read More

Russian Hacker Made $3,000,000 with Botnet

According to the latest media reports, it has been recently uncovered how far one of the online criminal’s reach went. An individual in his 20s, somewhere in the Russian Federation, used a bunch of criminal toolkits to help him earn money, which resulted in attacking more than 90 countries and stealing $3.2 million in only six months.

The security experts believe that Soldier employed a network of money mules, as well as had an accomplice presumably residing in the states. Overall, since this past January, the hacker has been pocketing $17,000 per day. This is what threat researcher Loucif Kharouni pointed out in his research, describing the antics of some Russian hacker known online as Soldier. The hacker was using SpyEye and ZeuS binaries and blackhat SEO in his illegal activity across the Internet. He allegedly traded in traffic with a number of other hackers online, employing various malware to extract money from multiple accounts (most of them located in the United States) and steal security credentials. The most interesting part of this story is that it wasn’t just ordinary people’s dodgy attachments that had been hit by the malware – we are talking about high security organizations and American corporations being among those hit.

All in all, the hacker has successfully infected over 25,000 systems from April to June, which may appear good for Microsoft’s push in making users to upgrade, since most of the victims used Windows XP on their computers. However, around 4,500 Windows 7 machines also took the hit, according to the results of the study. Currently the investigation is still open, with experts trying to find out how they could notify victims.

Read More

Twitter Will Allow Advertising in Timeline

The worldwide-known micro-blogging service Twitter will now let brands to advertise in users’ timelines, even if the users don’t follow the advertiser.

Back in July this year, Twitter introduced promoted tweets as its unique form of advertising in users’ timelines. The users of the service could see some sponsored messages in their timelines, but all those messages were from brands and outfits they already followed. Earlier, promoted tweets could only be seen in search results or on the top of the Twitter trends lists. However, according to the new announced system, the users of the service are now able to be served advertisements from brands in their personal timelines, regardless of whether they even follow them or not.

Apparently, this will be the first time that Twitter users are exposed to advertisements in their timelines from the companies they don’t even follow. The company’s representative claimed that it would make such feature available to a single-digit percentage of its global user base. Moreover, of that group, Twitter promised only to show promoted tweets to users from advertisers that are relevant to their interests. The company explained it is carefully investigating how users respond to such tweets, and based on that response, it would roll this capability out to an expanded audience in the nearest future.

Of course, the consumers have a right to choose. Twitter users will be able to remove the advertisement, also called “timely tweet”, from their timelines with a single click. The local media report that Disney, Pepsi and Xbox will be the first clients of Twitter, which advertisements will be presented to the consumers while rolling out the next stage of this company’s advertising program.

Read More

Facebook Patented Tracking Method

Although the social networking service Facebook has previously denied that it was interested in what its members do on other online locations, the news is that some evidence has been found that Facebook had developed its own technology to do just that.

One of the Australian bloggers has found a patent that was dated October 2011. According to the information the patent contained, Facebook has described there a method to monitor information about the activities of the social network’s members while on another domain.
The blogger explained that tracking cookies are able to monitor Facebook users whenever they surf any online services having an integrated Facebook “like” button.

One of the Illinois residents has already filed a lawsuit over such tracking on behalf of Facebook users in the United States, so he is currently seeking class action status. As for the most popular social network in the world, it previously claimed that cookies were tracking users by mistake. However, the latest post of the plaintiffs proved that Facebook hasn’t turned the tracking off. Instead, it patented it!

The representatives of Facebook maintain the official line that tracking cookies have only been installed when the registered members accessed Facebook.com. However, the opponents revealed that the cookies were set by all websites containing Facebook widgets. Moreover, it was found out that one of the tracking cookies monitors the users’ activity even if they had never been to the Facebook website at all, and even if they have never clicked a “like” or “share” button.

This is not the first time the cookie was found out: it was disabled after an outcry in The Wall Street Journal earlier in 2011, but later it has quietly returned. The patent, bearing the catchy title “Communicating Information in a Social Network System about Activities from Another Domain”, is all about tracking Facebook members outside of Facebook.com domain. The patent describes maintaining a “profile” of the users while they are moving around the Internet, as well as logging the actions taken on the 3rd-party domains.

In response, a spokesman for Facebook claimed that the patent wasn’t intended to track those users who had logged out from the social networking site. Facebook has also pointed out that the idea in question has only been patented, but hasn’t been used yet.

Read More