Connect with us

Cybersecurity

World’s Biggest Internet & Telecom Giants Are failing at Protecting Users’ Digital Rights

Published

on

 Google has the highest score. Facebook, not so much. Overall, there are no winners. Users are still the losers.

An independent ranking chart pitting the world’s biggest internet and telecommunications giants to look at corporate practices and measures used for protecting the freedom of expression and privacy among millions of users revealed Google to rank the highest. Facebook figures way behind.

The scale is a part of ‘The Ranking Digital Rights 2015 Corporate Accountability Index’ overseen by non-profit Ranking Digital Rights, wherein a number of indicators were accounted for to ultimately provide an aggregate score of the world’s foremost internet and telecom companies’ privacy policies and practices.

Accountability Index

A total of 31 indicators rooted in three categories including privacy, freedom of expression and commitment were assessed. Guidelines for the three categories were borrowed heavily from existing international human rights frameworks.

Right away, the report reveals a damning claim:

We found that many of the world’s most powerful internet and telecommunications companies fail to disclose key information about practices affecting users’ rights.

Quite simply, the index shows user privacy isn’t at the top of the priority list for most tech giants, if at all any.GoogleHQ

Eight of the top publicly listed companies each in the telecom industry and the internet space to a total of 16 were chosen for the index.

Citing the need for substantial improvement, only six companies of the sixteen scored at least 50 percent with Google being the overall highest at 65.

Half the companies in the list scored less than 25 percent to show “a serious deficit of respect for users’ freedom of expression and privacy.”

The director of Ranking Digital Rights, Rebecca MacKinnon said:

When we put the rankings in perspective, it’s clear there are no winners.

Few Key Insights from the Rankings:

  • Microsoft ranked the best among the commitment indicator for its openly disclosed commitments to users’ digital rights and subsequent measures to implement those commitments.
  • Facebook’s lack of disclosures and poor policies with recent acquisitions Instagram and Whatsapp and its own privacy disclosures are lagging behind every other company in the index.
  • Google’s business model wherein customized data is sold to advertisers in a round-about way restricts the search giant from gaining better numbers, despite it being first among all companies ranked.
  • Overall, disclosures relating to collection, sharing, usage and retention of user information are poorly done by most companies and are ambiguous at best.

While the scores of individual companies may be deemed arbitrary, it shows an insightful glimpse into where the world’s foremost internet and communications companies — those who service billions of users globally — are succeeding and failing in their practices and policies.

It isn’t all gloomy, however, as the report highlights every company in the index to, at the very least, have policies in place to safeguard users’ digital rights. Furthermore, companies are also becoming more transparent in revealing information about government requests to look into users’ information, deny services or censor content.

The entire index with detailed insights into all 16 companies ranked across various parameters can be found here.

Ranking Digital Rights is a non-profit research initiative based in Washington D.C. and collaborates with an international network of partners to improve freedom of expression and privacy by focusing on policies and practices of companies, predominantly in the information technology sector.

Images from Shutterstock & Digital Rights Group.

Important: Never invest (trade with) money you can't afford to comfortably lose. Always do your own research and due diligence before placing a trade. Read our Terms & Conditions here. Trade recommendations and analysis are written by our analysts which might have different opinions. Read my 6 Golden Steps to Financial Freedom here. Best regards, Jonas Borchgrevink.

Rate this post:

Important for improving the service. Please add a comment in the comment field below explaining what you rated and why you gave it that rate. Failed Trade Recommendations should not be rated as that is considered a failure either way.
0 votes, average: 0.00 out of 50 votes, average: 0.00 out of 50 votes, average: 0.00 out of 50 votes, average: 0.00 out of 50 votes, average: 0.00 out of 5 (0 votes, average: 0.00 out of 5)
You need to be a registered member to rate this.
Loading...

4 stars on average, based on 1 rated postsSamburaj is the contributing editor at Hacked and keeps tabs on science, technology and cyber security.




Feedback or Requests?

Altcoins

Monero Price Analysis: Stronger Malware to Mine Monero; XMR/USD Has Room for Another Potential Squeeze South

Published

on

  • Researchers: a stronger malware has been uncovered, which can mine Monero.
  • XMR/USD price action remains stuck in a narrowing range, subject to an imminent breakout.

The XMR/USD price has seen some upside on Saturday, holding gains of around 3% towards the latter stages of the day. Despite the press higher from the bulls, a move which has been observed across the cryptocurrency market, vulnerabilities remain. Price action has been ranging for the past nine sessions. Once again, this isn’t specifically just XMR, as this type of behavior is witnessed across the board. The narrowing in play came after the steep drop that rippled across the market on 10th January.

Price action was initially well-supported to the upside by an ascending trend line, which was in play from 15th December. This at the time was a very promising recovery, as XMR/USD had gained as much as 55%. Unfortunately, however, the bulls were unable to break down supply heading into the $60 region and were eventually dealt a big hammer blow. On 10th January, the market bears forced a heavy breach to the downside, smashing through this support. The price had dropped a big double-digits, some 20%.

Stronger Malware Mining Monero (XMR)

There is a dangerous form of malware that can bypass being detected and mine Monero (XMR) on cloud-based servers. A recent notice was put out by Palo Alto Networks’ Unit 42, an intelligence team that specializes in cyber threats, regarding a Linux mining malware. This was detailed to have been developed by Rocke group, which has the ability uninstall cloud security products. It can do this to the likes of Alibaba Cloud and Tencent Cloud, to then illegally mine Monero on compromised machines.

The two researchers from Palo Alto Networks, Xingyu Jin and Claud Xiao, detailed the findings of their studies. Once the malware is downloaded, it takes administrative control to initially uninstall all cloud security products. Shortly after, it will then then transmit code that will mine the Monero (XMR). Further within their press release, they said, “To the best of our knowledge, this is the first malware family that developed the unique capability to target and remove cloud security products.”

Technical Review – XMR/USD

XMR/USD daily chart.

Given the current range block formation, eyes should be on the key near-term technical areas. Firstly, to the downside, $43, which is the lower part of the range. A breach here will likely see a retest of the December low, $38. To the upside, resistance be observed at around the mid $46 level. Should a breakout be observed here, then a potential retest of the broken trend line will be watched.

Disclaimer: The author owns Bitcoin, Ethereum and other cryptocurrencies. He holds investment positions in the coins, but does not engage in short-term or day-trading.

Featured image courtesy of Shutterstock.

Important: Never invest (trade with) money you can't afford to comfortably lose. Always do your own research and due diligence before placing a trade. Read our Terms & Conditions here. Trade recommendations and analysis are written by our analysts which might have different opinions. Read my 6 Golden Steps to Financial Freedom here. Best regards, Jonas Borchgrevink.

Rate this post:

Important for improving the service. Please add a comment in the comment field below explaining what you rated and why you gave it that rate. Failed Trade Recommendations should not be rated as that is considered a failure either way.
0 votes, average: 0.00 out of 50 votes, average: 0.00 out of 50 votes, average: 0.00 out of 50 votes, average: 0.00 out of 50 votes, average: 0.00 out of 5 (0 votes, average: 0.00 out of 5)
You need to be a registered member to rate this.
Loading...

4.6 stars on average, based on 124 rated postsKen has over 8 years exposure to the financial markets. During a large part of his career, he worked as an analyst, covering a variety of asset classes; forex, fixed income, commodities, equities and cryptocurrencies. Ken has gone on to become a regular contributor across several large news and analysis outlets.




Feedback or Requests?

Continue Reading

Altcoins

Dash 51% Attack Fears Cooled as Core Dev Group Suggest Benevolent Miner

Published

on

Dash investors may have been starting to question the security of their holdings in light of Ethereum Classic’s (ETC) recent attack, and the subsequent fallout which revealed Dash’s own vulnerability to 51% attacks.

Three addresses, all controlled by the same user, were in control of more than 51% of the Dash mining hashrate, as reported on CCN a few days ago. On top of that, over 74% of the entire Dash hashrate was accessible via Nicehash – a cloud-mining marketplace – where it could be purchased for as little as $3,104 per hour.

Hashing Power Removed from Nicehash

As of Saturday’s statement by the Dash Core Group, the same individual still controls the majority of the Dash hashrate. However, the group pointed out that since the news concerning a 51% attack broke out earlier this week, the individual has begun to remove their hashing power from Nicehash, and spread it around separate mining pools.

The team stated clearly that they do not believe the miner in question to be malicious:

“…we don’t believe the entity in control of the wallets in question plans or wants to attack because their mining activities began at least 4 months ago and their blocks have been published for all to see.”

The group believe the sudden removal of hashing power from Nicehash – as shown above – is a signal of benevolent intentions on the part of the miner. As a major holder of Dash, they reason that the miner would want to secure the network as best they could.

“This removes the risk of a malicious party renting the hashing power via NiceHash and simultaneously signals that the entity in control of the hashing power does not have negative intent. We believe the miner behind the hashing power was made aware by the same info we discovered online and quickly moved to more protected pools as they appear to be a major stakeholder of Dash.”

Future Proof?

The announcement ends with a look to the future in the form of Dash’s upcoming ChainLocks technology. To be implemented in an as yet unspecified future update, ChainLocks will unite the mining layer with that of the Dash’s masternodes.

This means that a 51% attacker would also have to secure a majority of the blockchain’s masternodes to execute their plans. More can be read on ChainLocks here.

Dash Coin Price

Almost mid-way through the first month of 2019, Dash has recovered 26% of its value since the market lows of mid-December. That’s when one unit of DASH was valued at $58.27 – a 96% decline since December 2017.

Dash’s 26% recovery in the past month still leaves the coin 95% off its all-time high. As of Saturday the coin had settled down along with the broader market, after a sharp 17.5% decline 48 hours before.

Disclaimer: The author owns bitcoin, Ethereum and other cryptocurrencies. He holds investment positions in the coins, but does not engage in short-term or day-trading.

Featured image courtesy of Shutterstock.

Important: Never invest (trade with) money you can't afford to comfortably lose. Always do your own research and due diligence before placing a trade. Read our Terms & Conditions here. Trade recommendations and analysis are written by our analysts which might have different opinions. Read my 6 Golden Steps to Financial Freedom here. Best regards, Jonas Borchgrevink.

Rate this post:

Important for improving the service. Please add a comment in the comment field below explaining what you rated and why you gave it that rate. Failed Trade Recommendations should not be rated as that is considered a failure either way.
0 votes, average: 0.00 out of 50 votes, average: 0.00 out of 50 votes, average: 0.00 out of 50 votes, average: 0.00 out of 50 votes, average: 0.00 out of 5 (0 votes, average: 0.00 out of 5)
You need to be a registered member to rate this.
Loading...

4.5 stars on average, based on 146 rated postsGreg Thomson is a full-time crypto writer and digital nomad. He eats ICOs for breakfast and bleeds altcoins. Wherever he lays his public key is his home.




Feedback or Requests?

Continue Reading

Cryptocurrencies

Where to Store Your Crypto?

Published

on

By

Storing crypto on virtual exchanges has some inherent security risks that have been exploited by hackers and cyber criminals. This article will touch upon this important topic and provide you with alternative methods in which to store your digital assets.

Cold and Hot Wallets

The main thing in cryptocurrency storage is the private key and who has access to it.

Cold storage wallets operate offline and without a constant internet connection. If your key is not on the Internet, then it is much more difficult to steal.

A hot storage wallet is a wallet with constant connection to the Internet.

So, all storage options can be distinguished by the following criteria:

  1. private keys are kept by you or by third parties.
  2. without internet connection or with internet connection

A cold storage wallet with a private key is considered the most reliable storage option. Such a wallet is suitable for long-term storage of large amounts. However, it is not convenient if, for example, you do trading and need access to your wallet for transferring small amounts.

Hardware Wallets

hardware wallets like Ledger, Trezor, Pi Wallet, Keepkey, Opendime, Bitlox, etc. have a flash drive within the software without an internet connection. You can connect to the Internet only when sending a transaction. You need to confirm the transaction physically, from the device itself. This is a “cold” method of storage without an internet connection (connection only at the time of the transaction). The user keeps private keys.

Paper Wallets

This method of storage will be also convenient for you if you want to conserve your funds for an extended period. In offline mode, you can generate a public and private key. For example, if you are using the service walletgenerator.net it will transfer those keys in the form of a QR-code, which can be printed and stored by you.

Physical Bitcoin Wallet

A physical bitcoin wallet has almost the same properties as a paper wallet. Encrypted bitcoins cannot be spent until the seal protecting the secret key has been broken. However, the security of the seal is not considered very reliable.

Desktop Offline Wallets.

There are also two main types of offline wallets:

  1. Wallets, where the user is the only one with the access to private keys. You can install such wallets on a personal computer as a separate program. As a rule, these are the wallets from the developers of that cryptocurrency. For example, Bitcoin Core. Litecoin Core, Mist, etc. Such wallets are also called “heavy” wallets since during installation they take up quite a lot of space (for example, you will have to free up at least 200 GB for a Bitcoin wallet in 2018). When installing such wallets on laptops flash drives that are disconnected from the Internet can also be called “cold” wallets. In general, they are also considered safe.
  2. The so-called “light” offline wallets. These are desktop wallets that allow you to store cryptocurrency without downloading its full registry to a bunch of gigabytes. Some of them give you private keys and the ability to restore a lost wallet at any time using seed phrases. There is a drawback – they do not always contain the full version of the blockchain, and sometimes won’t show up-to-date transaction information. Examples of such a wallet are Electrum and Armory.

Light wallets can be multi-currency, with a built-in internal exchange for example Exodus. Its private keys can also be restored using seed-phrases. However, inside such wallets, not only you but also developers have access to your private keys.

It is also worth to mention an essential aspect of light wallets, which are open source code. If something happens to the wallet, then it will be only possible to restore the wallet using the seed phrase only if the function is restored.

As a conclusion on cold wallets, I can say that their main advantage is reliability and security, and the main drawback is that it is difficult to move cryptocurrencies quickly. Therefore, cold wallets are suitable for long-term storage. For everyday transactions, hot wallets are the best. The exceptions are some hardware wallets that are compatible with online cryptocurrency storage and exchange services.

Disclaimer: The author owns bitcoin, Ethereum and other cryptocurrencies. He holds investment positions in the coins, but does not engage in short-term or day-trading.

Featured image courtesy of Shutterstock.

Important: Never invest (trade with) money you can't afford to comfortably lose. Always do your own research and due diligence before placing a trade. Read our Terms & Conditions here. Trade recommendations and analysis are written by our analysts which might have different opinions. Read my 6 Golden Steps to Financial Freedom here. Best regards, Jonas Borchgrevink.

Rate this post:

Important for improving the service. Please add a comment in the comment field below explaining what you rated and why you gave it that rate. Failed Trade Recommendations should not be rated as that is considered a failure either way.
2 votes, average: 5.00 out of 52 votes, average: 5.00 out of 52 votes, average: 5.00 out of 52 votes, average: 5.00 out of 52 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5 (2 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)
You need to be a registered member to rate this.
Loading...

4.9 stars on average, based on 43 rated postsVladislav Semjonov has a legal and financial background. He has been involved in crypto space since early 2017 in both ICO advising positions in several ICO consultancy firms, and as an ICO analyst for VC. He began contributing for Hacked.com in April 2017.




Feedback or Requests?

Continue Reading

Recent Posts

A part of CCN

Hacked.com is Neutral and Unbiased

Hacked.com and its team members have pledged to reject any form of advertisement or sponsorships from 3rd parties. We will always be neutral and we strive towards a fully unbiased view on all topics. Whenever an author has a conflicting interest, that should be clearly stated in the post itself with a disclaimer. If you suspect that one of our team members are biased, please notify me immediately at jonas.borchgrevink(at)hacked.com.

Trending