The database included details from many of the most popular social networks
More than two million stolen passwords used for sites such as Facebook, Google and Yahoo and other web services have been posted online.
The details had probably been uploaded by a criminal gang, security experts said.
It is suspected the data was taken from computers infected with malicious software that logged key presses.
It is not known how old the details are – but the experts warned that even out-dated information posed a risk.
“We don't know how many of these details still work,” said security researcher Graham Cluley. “But we know that 30-40% of people use the same passwords on different websites.
In a blog post outlining its findings, the team said it believed the passwords had been harvested by a large botnet – dubbed Pony – that had scooped up information from thousands of infected computers worldwide.
Some people might say that Google abandons and starts projects on a whim. In the past, the search giant makes provided explanations for projects that could not be completed and promises they were unable to keep. But has the abandonment mentality and prideful hot hair stopped this habit? Marketing Land’s Danny Sullivan further explores this question in, “Google’s Broken Promises And Who’s Running The Search Engine?”
What promises has Google broken? Google Shopping was supposed to index prices of items across the Web, but it only displays results from paying vendors. Google once fought against shopping search engines that only included shopping results, but not the company claims that is the only way to get viable information.
Google also promised it would keep its searches banner free. Guess what they are doing now? Google stated that they are only conducting a US banner tests to allow advertisers to add images to relevant search queries.
Why Google is doing this may be that the company has had to adapt, but it goes against Google’s original philosophy:
“You’d think they caused some internal debate. Was there anyone at Google saying that if giant graphical units at the top of search results are useful to searchers, then maybe Google should be offering those for free, to ensure a consistent experience for those searchers? Was there anyone at Google saying that maybe a shift to paid inclusion was a bad move for shopping and other search products, because it opens up every search product to that possibility?”
Google is not sharing explanations with the public, however. In my opinion, the root of the problem is that no one is officially assigned to run search products. The company is instead focusing on other areas and neglecting its star. What is even worse is that the fuzzy management holds no one accountable for the broken promises. Google’s main search focus is making money and not providing accurate results.
Since Google is the biggest search player, what does this mean for other search components like SEO? Will paid results dwarf SEO? It also begs the question if SEO focuses on search? Money makes the world go around I guess.
“The contract, for which the DISA began drafting a request for proposals this summer, would have picked up to 10 cloud providers to supply Internet-accessible file storage, database hosting, Web hosting, and virtual servers—allowing the military to offload public, non-sensitive systems from its own infrastructure. As it turns out, the various military services and other DOD agencies that the DISA serves aren’t terribly interested in doing that. The federal government… has been trying to reduce the number of public-facing websites it maintains.”
It is yet to be determined whether the contract is being adjusted to meet the more modest requirements or scrapped entirely. As mentioned in the quote, this is not the only instance of concerns of overspending. In 2011 the White House froze all creation of new websites. In the meantime, the military has been dealing with security issues that have caused them to rely on DISA’s data centers.
An article posted on Tech Eye titled US Spying is Killing the Internet Claims Google explains the outrage expressed by Google when it was released that the NSA had tapped into their system in order to obtain user information. Google’s security director Richard Salgado warns that the US government’s snooping could eventually lead to a “splinter net” in which governments put up barriers and cause the market to be restricted.
The article explains:
“Salgado warned that the NSA operations led to “a real concern” inside and outside the United States about the role of government and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which decides in secret on legal problems about electronic surveillance efforts.”
But is the lady protesting too much? Google has been accused of its own plans to take over the Internet, as this article titled Google’s Latest Scheme to Control the Internet May Surprise You investigates on Worldcrunch. Google Plus in particular might warrant extra attention. In spite of being considered a failure when likened to Facebook, the article suggests that comparison is faulty. The number of Google Plus members may be small, but more important is Google’s ability to track and store the information we input.
And the money talks:
“Perhaps the proof is in the numbers: Google generated $50 billion in 2012 revenue, $40 billion of it from advertising. And though 2.7 billion Facebook “likes” are being registered every day, its revenue during the same period was just $4 billion.”
So let Google worry about the NSA all they want. Some of us are preoccupied with our paranoia about another company, which the article sums up as a Keanu Reeves style matrix in which we will all stay happily ignorant of our dependence.
It’s time to move on. The feeling is becoming more and more significant with each passing day and it just keeps spreading.
It’s just not it any more… we want something new, exciting, which can take us places we’ve never been. We want to be surprised again. We want a new, better social network.
Facebook may say its user base is growing, but original members from the last decade appear to be leaving in droves. As more niche networking services and platforms enter the space, people are finding that not any one company is serving all of their networking needs. Our tastes and channels are becoming fragmented, and users are pushing back on accepted norms in the social media space.
This is inevitable. It’s a natural life cycle for any product; unless it somehow becomes a living organism with its own reproductive system and evolution, one will eventually wither and die. Facebook cannot evade this process – it regenerates with nuances, but is not reinventing itself.
Facebook today doesn’t resemble a thriving, living metropolis – it’s more of a friendly neighborhood bar. For that reason, FB will face its cruel destiny of simply fading away. Living in the same city as your parents is forgiven and acceptable; there is enough diversity and distance between everyone. But finding yourself sitting in the same bar as your mom and dad – that’s horrifying. When your father posts pictures of sunsets and breakfast on his wall you know it’s over.
The conclusion is undeniable; a new social network is needed. These are the things that will make it awesome and sustainable:
Disclosure of US intelligence surveillance activities in Germany and other allied countries has aroused angry political and public reaction in those countries. The whistleblower Edward Snowden has revealed close technical cooperation and a loose alliance between British, German, French, Spanish and Swedish spy agencies. The German Government in particular has expressed disbelief and fury at the revelations that the US National Security Agency (NSA) monitored Angela Merkel's mobile phone calls. Even the Secretary General of the UN is regarded as fair game by the NSA.
But questions concerning the integrity and professionalism of UK and US intelligence services are nothing new. In March 2003, GCHQ‘whistleblower’ Katharine Gun revealed in a leaked email that the NSA was eavesdropping on UN Security Council diplomats belonging to the group of ‘swing nations’ that were undecided on the question of war against Iraq. The NSA requested the help of its British counterparts at GCHQ to collect information on those diplomats.
Phi Beta Iota: Above is our title. We continue to be dismayed by the lack of ethics and the predatory pervasiveness of Google manipulation of search results depending on the degree to which it is paid in cash or information. Google is corrupt. Google is corrupting everything it touches.
The article on c/net titled WordPress Folds in Google Plus For Authentication, Comments offers insight into the new changes. Justin Shreve from WordPress described the benefits of the deal as increasing the verification of ones’ posts by creating an “official connection” between the Google Plus Profile and WordPress.com content that is being generated.
The article explains:
“WordPress, the widely used blogging system, has built in Google+ technology that will let publishers use the service for authentication, comments, and sharing.
The deal, announced Monday, spreads Google’s influence into a Web site that’s very widely used for blogs and other self-publishing needs. Even as it elevates the profile of Google’s social-networking technology, though, it also lowers barriers between Google+ and other parts of the Web. “
There’s nothing like forcing an agenda, but both companies seem to benefit from this deal, with WordPress users able to send their content to Google Plus with a feature called publicize, as well as receive a more prominent position in search results. Google will gain more information about its users from the pages created, improving search result accuracy. Furthermore, WordPress users will now be able to embed onto their WordPress sites what they have published on Google Plus.
