UPDATE: This sweepstakes is now closed. The winner will be contacted and then announced via our Facebook page.
You may have heard about the recent “Facebook burglaries.” Using the world”s most popular social network, a group of thieves allegedly went on spree that raked in over $100,000 in stolen goods.
A little reporting on the crimes revealed that two of the cases in the spree involved Facebook. In those cases, the perpetrators had “friended” their targets, gaining access to the homeowners’ wall posts.
A PR rep from Facebook offered this advice: If you wouldn’t tell someone in person that you are leaving town, you probably shouldn’t use Facebook to tell him or her.
In real life, you don’t make friends with anyone who comes along, and you don’t share your travel plans with strangers. People do things online that they would NEVER do in the real world.
That’s why over the next 6 weeks we’re going to be reminding you of some smart online safety practices and celebrating the launch of F-Secure Internet Security 2011.
Just answer the question below on the comments of this post and you’ll be entered to win an incredible HD HERO Naked wearable camera for you PLUS F-Secure Internet Security 2011 for you and a friend. You can see the complete rules for this giveaway here.
Here’s the question for week #1: Where in the real world are you?
We don’t want to know your exact location right now because you’re too smart to reveal your exact location to complete strangers. Just give us an idea. You can tell us which planet, hemisphere, continent, country, state, province, city or neighborhood you spend most of your time. To make it easy, you can post a link to a picture that answers the question.
Again, once you’ve read the rules, all you have to do to for your chance to win is to comment on this post. Good luck!
F-Secure Internet Security 2011
GET REAL SWEEPSTAKES WEEK #1 – COMPETITION RULES AND PRIZES
If you do not accept these rules, please do not enter this promotion.
1. The sponsor of this promotion is F-Secure Corporation, located at Tammasaarenkatu 7, Po. Box 24, 00181 Helsinki, Finland (“Sponsor”).
2. The promotion will begin at 6:00 PM PDT on September 19, 2010 and end at 6:00 PM PDT September 26, 2010.
3. This promotion is void where prohibited or restricted by law. No purchase is necessary to enter.
4. 3 prizes a HD Hero Naked camera with a retail value of $259.99 and 2 F-Secure Internet Security licenses with a retail value of $119.98 will be given as prizes in this promotion at the close of the competition.
5. Only one (1) entry, per person per Sweepstakes will be accepted. Further attempts made by the same person and entries generated by a script, computer programs, macro, programmed, robotic or other automated means will be disqualified.
6. The winner will be chosen randomly from the people who participated in the competition by commenting on the “Get Real Sweepstakes Week #1 “. Sponsor will notify the winner via email. If the winner does not respond within seven (7) days, he or she will forfeit the prize and another winner will be randomly chosen. This prize is shipped to the winner within 30 days of the promotion closing date.
7. The winners are responsible for any taxes associated with receipt of the prizes. Sponsor reserves the right to substitute the prizes with other prizes of equal or greater value if the prize is not available for any reason.
8. Odds of winning the prizes depend upon the total number of eligible entries received.
9. No purchase or software download is necessary to enter or win. Purchase or software download will not increase your chances of winning.
10. To enter, visit http://safeandsavvy.f-secure.com/2010/09/19/get-real-sweepstakes-1/ and comment on the post. To comment you must provide your email address, which will not be made public. Entries are the property of Sponsor and will not be acknowledged or returned. Comments made be edited by F-Secure without explanation.
11. Any entrant who attempts to cheat or tamper with the Get Real Sweepstakes shall be disqualified by the Sponsor’s sole discretion.
11. The name of the winner will be announced via the F-Secure Twitter channel http://twitter.com/FSecure, F-Secure Facebook page http://www.facebook.com/FSecure and F-Secure’s Safe and Savvy blog http://safeandsavvy.f-secure.com/ once the winner has been contacted. By entering, the entrant agrees that his/her name, country and/or picture can be published at F-Secure’s aforementioned channels if he/she wins.
12. By entering, entrants agree to release and hold harmless Sponsor and all of its representatives from and against any and all costs, expenses, claims, demands, proceedings, suits, actions and/or liabilities for any injuries, death, loss or damage of any kind arising from or in connection with accidents, terrorism, theft, natural disaster, the promotion of the Get Real Sweepstakes, the distribution of any prize, entrants’ participation in and/or entry into the Get Real Sweepstakes, acceptance or use of any prize or unavailability of any prize. Prizes are provided “AS IS” without warranty of any kind from the sponsor.
13. Employees of Sponsor and family members of such employees are not eligible to enter.
© 2010 F-SECURE CORPORATION. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
CC image by woodley wonderworks.
Everybody probably agree that the net has developed a discussion culture very different from what we are used to in real life. The used adjectives vary form inspiring, free and unrestricted to crazy, sick and shocking. The (apparent) anonymity when discussing on-line leads to more open and frank opinions, which is both good and bad. It becomes especially bad when it turns into libel and hate speech. What do you think about this? Read on and let us know in the poll below. We do have laws to protect us against defamation. But the police still has a very varying ability to deal with crimes on the net. And the global nature of Internet makes investigations harder. Most cases are international, at least here in Europe where we to a large extent rely on US-based services. This is in the headlines right now here in Finland because of a recent case. The original coverage is in Finnish so I will give you a short summary in English. A journalist named Sari Helin blogged about equal rights for sexual minorities, and how children are very natural and doesn’t react anyway if a friend has two mothers, for example. This is a sensitive topic and, hardly surprising, she got a lot of negative feedback. Part of the feedback was clear defamation. Calling her a whore, among other nasty things. She considered it for a while and finally decided to report the case to the police, mainly because of Facebook comments. This is where the really interesting part begins. Recently the prosecutor released the decision about the case. They simply decided to drop it and not even try to investigate. The reason? Facebook is in US and it would be too much work contacting the authorities over there for this rather small crime. A separately interviewed police officer also stated that many of the requests that are sent abroad remain unanswered, probably for the same reason. This reflects the situation in Finland, but I guess there are a lot of other countries where the same could have happened. Is this OK? The resourcing argument is understandable. The authorities have plenty of more severe crimes to deal with. But accepting this means that law and reality drift even further apart. Something is illegal but everybody knows you will get away with the crime. That’s not good. Should we increase resourcing and work hard to make international investigations smoother? That’s really the only way to make the current laws enforceable. The other possible path is to alter our mindset about Internet discussions. If I write something pro-gay on the net, I know there’s a lot of people who dislike it and think bad things about me. Does it really change anything if some of these people write down their thoughts and comment on my writings? No, not really. But most people still feel insulted in cases like this. I think we slowly are getting used to the different discussion climate on the net. We realize that some kinds of writing will get negative feedback. We are prepared for that and can ignore libel without factual content. We value feedback from reputable persons, and anonymous submissions naturally have less significance. Pure emotional venting without factual content can just be ignored and is more shameful for the writer than for the object. Well, we are still far from that mindset, even if we are moving towards it. But which way should we go? Should we work hard to enforce the current law and prosecute anonymous defamers? Or should we adopt our mindset to the new discussion culture? The world is never black & white and there will naturally be development on both these fronts. But in which direction would you steer the development if you could decide? Now you have to pick the one you think is more important. [polldaddy poll=8293148] Looking forward to see what you think. The poll will be open for a while and is closed when we have enough data. Safe surfing, Micke
You have all seen the pictures circulating on the net. A bunch of people all tapping at their smartphones and paying no attention to the world around them. With the title: ANTISOCIAL. And you have probably also seen this is real life. Sometimes a friend just seems to be more interested in the phone than in you. And maybe it has been the other way around sometime? ;) Most of these people are probably using social media. I do agree that it is rude to ignore persons who are physically present and pay more attention to the phone. Especially if you are alone with someone. And yes, that behavior seems antisocial from other’s point of view. But the funny thing is really that social media and our mobile devices form the most social system invented so far. Think about it. You can be in contact with people everywhere in the world. You can send and receive messages instantly and follow what others do right now. You can share your own feelings spontaneously. You can have a pure peer-to-peer exchange of thoughts not curated by any outsiders. You can select to communicate with a single person or a larger group. You are not limited to written text, you can use pictures and video as well. The real point here is that those “antisocial” types aren’t just tapping their phones, they are communicating with real people. Our traditional definition for the word social was formed before we had Internet. People associate it with personal face-to-face contact and are slow to update their mindsets. Or to be precise, we already have a younger generation who have grown up with the net and social media services. Their definition is up to date, but many of us older persons still see the net as less social or not social at all. Let’s all agree to never call someone who is concentrating on the phone antisocial. But the word rude may be justified. Let’s also agree to not be rude against others by ignoring them in favor of the phone. It’s of course OK to check the phone now and then at the party, but always prioritize people who are present and want to talk to you. And why not take it one step further? Turn off the phone and try to be without it for a couple of hours. Can you do it? Next time you go out for dinner with someone is a good time for that experiment. You may be less social on the net for a while, but your company will see you as much more social. Safe surfing, Micke PS. If you must be able to take urgent calls and can’t turn off the phone, at least turn off the data connection. That will mute the social media apps.
You have heard the news. Russian hackers have managed to collect a pile of no less than 1,2 billion stolen user IDs and passwords from approximately 420 000 different sites. That’s a lot of passwords and your own could very well be among them. But what’s really going on here? Why is this a risk for me and what should I do? Read on, let’s try to open this up a bit. First of all. There are intrusions in web systems every day and passwords get stolen. Stolen passwords are traded on the underground market and misused for many different purposes. This is nothing new. The real news here is just the size of the issue. The Russian hacker gang has used powerful scripts to harvest the Internet for vulnerable systems and automatically hacked them, ending up with this exceptionally large number of stolen passwords. But it is still good that people write and talk about this, it’s an excellent reminder of why your personal passwords habits are important. Let’s first walk you through how it can go wrong for an ordinary Internet user. Let’s call her Alice. Alice signs up for a mail account at Google. She’s lucky, firstname.lastname@example.org is free. She’s aware of the basic requirements for good passwords and selects one with upper- and lowercase letters, digits and some special characters. Alice is quite active on the net and uses Facebook as well as many smaller sites and discussion forums. Many of them accepts email@example.com as the user ID. And it’s very logical to also use the same password, it sort of belongs together with that mail address and who wants to remember many passwords? Now the evil hackers enter the scene and starts scanning the net for weak systems. Gmail is protected properly and withstands the attacks. But many smaller organizations have sites maintained on a hobby basis, and lack the skills and resources to really harden the site. One of these sites belongs to a football club where Alice is active. The hackers get access to this site’s user database and downloads it all. Now they know the password for firstname.lastname@example.org on that site. Big deal, you might think. The hackers know what games Alice will play in, no real harm done. But wait, that’s not all. It’s obvious that email@example.com is a Gmail user, so the hackers try her password on gmail.com. Bingo. They have her email, as well as all other data she keeps on the Google sites. They also scan through a large number of other popular internet sites, including Facebook. Bingo again. Now the hackers have Alice’s Facebook account and probably a couple of other sites too. Now the hackers starts to use their catch. They can harvest Alice’s accounts for information, mail conversations, other’s contact info and e-mails, documents, credit card numbers, you name it. They can also use her accounts and identity to send spam or do imposter scams, just to list some examples. So what’s the moral of the story? Alice used a good password but it didn’t protect her in this case. Her error was to reuse the password on many sites. The big sites usually have at least a decent level of security. But if you use the same password on many sites, its level of protection is the same as the weakest site where it has been used. That’s why reusing your main mail password, especially on small shady sites, is a huge no-no. But it is really inconvenient to use multiple strong passwords, you might be thinking right now. Well, that’s not really the case. You can have multiple passwords if you are systematic and use the right tools. Make up a system where there is a constant part in every password. This part should be strong and contain upper- and lowercase characters, digits and special characters. Then add a shorter variable part for every site. This will keep the passwords different and still be fairly easy to remember. Still worried about your memory? Don’t worry, we have a handy tool for you. The password manager F-Secure Key. But what about the initial question? Does this attack by the Russian hackers affect me? What should I do? We don’t know who’s affected as we don’t know (at the time of writing) which sites have been affected. But the number of stolen passwords is big so there is a real risk that you are among them. Anyway, if you recognize yourself in the story about Alice, then it is a good idea to start changing your passwords right away. You might not be among the victims of these Russian hackers, but you will for sure be a victim sooner or later. Secure your digital identities before it happens! If you on the other hand already have a good system with different passwords on all your sites, then there’s no reason to panic. It’s probably not worth the effort to start changing them all before we know which systems were affected. But if the list of these 420 000 sites becomes public, and you are a user of any of these sites, then it’s important to change your password on that site. Safe surfing, Micke