F-Secure helps customers enjoy their data when, where and how they want it

208640498_bc8f77cb87Content Anywhere from F-Secure enables operators to offer branded services to store and retrieve their data and content easily, flexibly and securely – giving expanded market reach, increased ARPU, and additional branding opportunities.

Your customers win because they can store, sync, share and access their photos, videos, documents and other data securely, from any device. They get a consistent user experience across their digital life with security based on F-Secure’s proven technology. You win through additional revenue opportunities and association of your brand.

Consumers are adopt more and more devices for daily use – from smart phones to tablets to laptops and pcs. And they want those devices to share and have access to more and more content – from simple documents to photos and videos and more. Research shows that consumers want personal cloud services and that they want to know their photos, videos, documents, and data are safe, secure, and under their control. According to our research* 68 percent of consumers are concerned about third parties gaining access to their content due to vulnerabilities in cloud storage providers’ technology, and 42 percent feel they are losing control of their content. Yet, these are issues that should be of concern for everyone!

“Content Anywhere is the world’s safest cloud,” says Timo Laaksonen, Vice President, Content Cloud at F-Secure. “We are a security company with over two decades of security expertise. Our cloud is built and managed according to proven security processes. It’s not simply an afterthought like some other services out there.”

Designed with platform openness, data portability and data sovereignty in mind, Content Anywhere can easily be configured under your brand’s look & feel, while the service platform integrates directly to your authentication, provisioning and billing systems. Further VAS services can also be launched on the platform with ease – giving you the opportunity to provide your customers with access to their precious content from any device with confidence it’s private and secure because it is offered from a brand they trust: yours.

*The F-Secure broadband survey covered web interviews of 6,400 broadband subscribers aged 20–60 years from 14 countries: France, the UK, Germany, Sweden, Finland, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands, Belgium, USA, Canada, Brazil, India and Japan. The survey was completed by GfK, 25 May–1 June 2012.

[Image by ^riza^ via Flickr]

More posts from this topic

Mikko Hypponen and Allen Scott receiving the award from Helen Anderson of Accenture.

F-Secure SAFE named Best Security at the ISPA Awards 2015

The Internet Service Provider Association (ISPA) held the 17th UK Internet industry awards on Thursday 2nd July at The Brewery in the City of London. The award ceremony was opened by none other than F-Secure’s chief research officer and world-renowned security expert, Mikko Hypponen. F-Secure’s comprehensive security solution SAFE won the inaugural Security Award. SAFE was shortlisted alongside Memset, Censorset, Fido Net and Talk Straight. SAFE is F-Secure’s flagship internet security product which works across PCs, Macs, smartphones and tablets. It is the first consumer security service that allows complete management of family security across multiple devices from a simple, intuitive and self-service portal. It uses award-winning cloud-based scanning engines to ensure users stay safe online. SAFE is more than just an anti-virus offering, as it also protects online banking and shopping through its Banking Protection feature and, for mobiles, it provides privacy features, as well as lock, wipe, locate and alarm. For families, there are advanced parental control settings that allows parents to define how much internet access children have, as well as which websites and apps they may use. ISPAs panel judges cited the flexibility, portability and range of features, including banking, identity and virus protection SAFE offers makes it an excellent choice for ISPs and their customers. F-Secure UK’s managing director Allen Scott said of the win, “As you can imagine, we are thrilled to have been selected by the judges for this award. We work closely with ISPs like Virgin Media, TalkTalk and Vodafone to provide our security products to their broadband subscribers. Keeping safe online is an important issue and this award is testament to the caliber of our product and the extra mile the team goes.” Other big winners of the evening were the Rt. Hon. David Davis MP and Tom Watson MP - both won the F-Secure sponsored Internet Hero Award for their legal challenge to guarantee the privacy of their constituents and their effort to raise the level of debate in Parliament on communications data issues. While, the Home Secretary, Rt. Hon. Theresa May MP won the Internet Villain award for trying to undermine the basic constitution of the publics freedom to privacy, with the aim of implementing the Snooper’s Charter.  

September 10, 2015
sign license

POLL – How should we deal with harmful license terms?

We blogged last week, once again, about the fact that people fail to read the license terms they approve when installing software. That post was inspired by a Chrome extension that monetized by collecting and selling data about users’ surfing behavior. People found out about this, got mad and called it spyware. Even if the data collection was documented in the privacy policy, and they technically had approved it. But this case is not really the point, it’s just an example of a very common business model on the Internet. The real point is what we should think about this business model. We have been used to free software and services on the net, and there are two major reasons for that. Initially the net was a playground for nerds and almost all services and programs were developed on a hobby or academic basis. The nerds were happy to give them away and all others were happy to get them for free. But businesses run into a problem when they tried to enter the net. There was no reliable payment method. This created the need for compensation models without money. The net of today is to a significant part powered by these moneyless business models. Products using them are often called free, which is incorrect as there usually is some kind of compensation involved. Nowadays we have money-based payment models too, but both our desire to get stuff for free and the moneyless models are still going strong. So what do these moneyless models really mean? Exposing the user to advertising is the best known example. This is a pretty open and honest model. Advertising can’t be hidden as the whole point is to make you see it. But it gets complicated when we start talking targeted advertising. Then someone need to know who you are and what you like, to be able to show you relevant ads. This is where it becomes a privacy issue. Ordinary users have no way to verify what data is collected about them and how it is used. Heck, often they don’t even know under what legislation it is stored and if the vendor respects privacy laws at all. Is this legal? Basically yes. Anyone is free to make agreements that involve submitting private data. But these scenarios can still be problematic in several ways. They may be in conflict with national consumer protection and privacy laws, but the most common complaint is that they aren’t fair. It’s practically impossible for ordinary users to read and understand many pages of legalese for every installed app. And some vendors utilize this by hiding the shady parts of the agreement deep into the mumbo jumbo. This creates a situation where the agreement may give significant rights to the vendor, which the users is totally unaware of. App permissions is nice development that attempts to tackle this problem. Modern operating systems for mobile devices require that apps are granted access to the resources they need. This enables the system to know more about what the app is up to and inform the user. But these rights are just becoming a slightly more advanced version of the license terms. People accept them without thinking about what they mean. This may be legal, but is it right? Personally I think the situation isn’t sustainable and something need to be done. But what? There are several ways to see this problem. What do you think is the best option?   [polldaddy poll=8801974]   The good news is however that you can avoid this problem. You can select to steer clear of “free” offerings and prefer software and services you pay money for. Their business model is simple and transparent, you get stuff and the vendor get money. These vendors do not need to hide scary clauses deep in the agreement document and can instead publish privacy principles like this.   Safe surfing, Micke     Photo by Orin Zebest at Flickr

April 15, 2015
webpage screenshot TOS

Sad figures about how many read the license terms

Do you remember our stunt in London where we offered free WiFi against getting your firstborn child? No, we have not collected any kids yet. But it sure was a nice demonstration of how careless we have become with user terms of software and service. It has been said that “Yes, I have read then license agreement” is the world’s biggest lie. Spot on! This was proven once again by a recent case where a Chrome extension was dragged into the spotlight accused of spying on users. Let’s first check the background. The “Webpage Screenshot” extension, which has been pulled from the Chrome Web Store, enabled users to conveniently take screenshots of web page content. It was a very popular extension with over 1,2 million users and tons of good reviews. But the problem is that the vendor seemed to get revenues by uploading user behavior, mainly visited web links, and monetizing on that data. The data upload was not very visible in the description, but the extension’s privacy policy did mention it. So the extension seemed to be acting according to what had been documented in the policy. Some people were upset and felt that they had been spied on. They installed the extension and had no clue that a screenshot utility would upload behavior data. And I can certainly understand why. But on the other hand, they did approve the user terms and conditions when installing. So they have technically given their approval to the data collection. Did the Webpage Screenshot users know what they signed up for? Let’s find out. It had 1 224 811 users when I collected this data. The question is how many of them had read the terms. You can pause here and think about it if you want to guess. The right answer follows below.   [caption id="attachment_8032" align="aligncenter" width="681"] Trying to access Webpage Screenshot gave an error in Chrome Web Store on April 7th 2015.[/caption]   The privacy policy was provided as a shortened URL which makes it possible to check its statistics. The link had been opened 146 times during the whole lifetime of the extension, slightly less than a year. Yes, only 146 times for over 1,2 million users! This means that only 0,012 % clicked the link! And the number of users who read all the way down to the data collection paragraph is even smaller. At least 99,988 % installed without reading the terms. So these figures support the claim that “I have read the terms” is the biggest lie. But they also show that “nobody reads the terms” is slightly incorrect.   Safe surfing, Micke   PS. Does F-Secure block this kind of programs? Typically no. They are usually not technically harmful, the user has installed them deliberately and we can’t really know what the user expects them to do. Or not to do. So this is not really a malware problem, it’s a fundamental problem in the business models of Internet.   Images: Screenshots from the Webpage Screenshot homepage and Chrome Web Store    

April 8, 2015