Showing posts with label Norton Scientific Reviews. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Norton Scientific Reviews. Show all posts

Friday, August 17, 2012

Scary cybercrime headlines l Tumblr


http://riamsogh.tumblr.com/post/29656863262/scary-cybercrime-headlines-fraud-surveys-helping

British Columbians are worried about cybersecurity but they’re also more likely than other Canadians to share their debit card personal identification numbers with others and take other risks that could leave them open to identity theft and other fraud.
These are among the findings of a survey released today by TD Canada Trust in conjunction with Fraud Prevention Month in Canada.
Visa Canada released its own survey, this one conducted by Ipsos Reid that found young Canadians, those aged 18 to 30 are the most likely to share too much personal information on social networking sites - information such as birthdates, home addresses and phone numbers that provide lucrative pickings for identity thieves, phishing expeditions and other online fraud.
Today’s releases come the week after Norton, the security company, released its top riskiest Canadian cities for cybercrime risk rankings. The polls and rankings all add up to a lot of scary headlines and ones Simon Fraser University communication professor Peter Chow-White suggest may be designed more for advertising and brand awareness than for research.
“I think it is to put a discourse of anxiety and fear into the public sphere,” he said. “They are all framed around risk, not safety.”
Chow-White suggests the practice of companies commissioning surveys and circulating them amongst the media creates a sense of insecurity and anxiety about online security.
“That’s what advertising does,” he said. “It’s trying to create a sense of anxiety amongst people for needing to do something, whether it’s white teeth, new tires or anything.
“This is just another episode in the long history of advertisers and companies creating market share, creating a market for their products.”
Chow-White points out that in all the survey press releases, the tips or suggestions for cyber security mostly lead back to the company that commissioned the survey.
Chow-White is of course right. We in the media hardly ever see a survey we resist reporting on. And while some are of the heavily academic and scientific variety, able to withstand the scrutiny of peer review, others are hardly more scientific than the ‘what do you think of this’ polls that I sometimes put on blog posts and still others fall somewhere in between.
Newsrooms get press releases trumpeting survey results pretty much on a daily basis. Some are tried and true favourites - like the one that measures how many people text from the bathroom, a tired headline but one that nonetheless is paraded out perennially. Or this year’s variation from eBay promoting eBay as a holiday shopping source:” “Did you know your friends were buying presents in the bathroom?”
Depending on the editor and whether it’s a slow news day, surveys get picked up and make headlines in media both online and off.
Do they serve a purpose other than to build brand awareness or provide fodder for techno trivia?
I thought about that as I considered today’s releases from Canada Trust and Visa Canada. Are surveys about the risk of fraud prompting people to pay more attention to their security, both online and off?
According to TD Canada Trust’s poll more British Columbian’s are taking steps to protect themselves from traditional forms of fraud, but there’s no telling whether it because they’ve been reading stories from such survey results. Some 86 per cent of people shield their PINs at banking machines compared to 77 per cent last year. I know I do ever since I wrote a story about fraudsters installing temporary cameras at ATMs to capture your PIN as your punch it in.
Some 27 per cent have spoken to their bank about reducing their withdrawal limit compared to 19 per cent who said that last year. In my case I lowered the limit on a credit card not because I read the stats but because I was the victim of credit card fraud - a circumstance that may lead many consumers to rethink their security measures.
However, the anxiety over risk hasn’t reached everyone in British Columbia. We’re the most likely of any consumers in Canada to carry our debit or credit card PIN in a wallet along with the card. Clearly we’re not frightened enough by the stats.
Visa Canada’s survey was also all about risk. Not surprisingly seniors were the least likely to engage in risky online behaviour - at least when it comes to over sharing - while young adults were most likely to take those risks. Young adults are also most likely to lend their bank or debit card to others.
What do you think? Should surveys commissioned by companies be consigned to the junk filter or do you think they serve a purpose?

Norton Audits, Inc. l Tumblr

http://riamsogh.tumblr.com/post/29656038439/norton-audits-inc-norton-audits-clinical-research-and

This is an advanced-level class that takes an in-depth examination of severe noncompliance, clinical data fabrication and falsification, scientific misconduct and fraud cases. The course focus is on developing skills for preventing fraud and misconduct and preparing clinical research professionals to better handle severe noncompliance. 

Tuesday, March 20, 2012

Norton Scientific: Invisible Man

nvisible Man is a novel written by Ralph Ellison, and the only one that he published during his lifetime (his other novels were published posthumously). It won him the National Book Award in 1953. The novel addresses many of the social and intellectual issues facing African-Americans in the early twentieth century, including black nationalism, the relationship between black identity andMarxism, and the reformist racialpolicies of Booker T. Washington, as well as issues of individuality and personal identity.

In 1998, the Modern Library ranked Invisible Man nineteenth on its list of the 100 best English-language novels of the 20th century.Time magazine included the novel in its TIME 100 Best English-language Novels from 1923 to 2005
Historical background
In his introduction to the 30th Anniversary Edition of Invisible Man,[2] Ellison says that he started writingthe book in a barn inWaitsfield, Vermont in the summer of 1945 while on sick leave from the Merchant Marine and that the novel continued to preoccupy him in various parts of New York City. In an interview in The Paris Review 1955,[3] Ellison states that the book took five years to complete with one year off for what he termed an "ill-conceived short novel." Invisible Man was published as a whole in 1952; however, copyright dates show the initial publication date as 1947, 1948, indicating that Ellison had published a section of the book prior to full publication. That section was the famous "Battle Royal" scene, which had been shown to Cyril Connolly, the editor of Horizonmagazine by Frank Taylor, one of Ellison's early supporters.

Ellison states in his National Book Award acceptance speech that he considered the novel's chief significance to be its experimental attitude. Rejecting the idea of social protest-as Ellison would later put it-he did not want to write another protest novel, and also seeing the highly regarded styles of Naturalism and Realism too limiting to speak to the broader issues of race and America, Ellison created an open style, one that did not restrict his ideas to a movement but was more free-flowing in its delivery. What Ellison finally settled on was a style based heavily upon modern symbolism. It was the kind of symbolism that Ellison first encountered in the poemThe Waste Land,[4] by T. S. Eliot. Ellison had read this poem as a freshman at the Tuskegee Institute and was immediately impressed by The Waste Land's ability to merge his two greatest passions, that of music and literature, for it was in The Waste Land that he first saw jazz set to words. When asked later what he had learned from the poem, Ellison responded: imagery, and also improvisation-techniques he had only before seen in jazz.

Ellison always believed that he would be a musician first and a writer second, and yet even so he had acknowledged that writing provided him a "growing satisfaction." It was a "covert process," according to Ellison: "a refusal of his right hand to let his left hand know what it was doing."[5]
Plot introduction
Invisible Man is narrated in the first person by the protagonist, an unnamed African American man who considers himself socially invisible. His character may have been inspired by Ellison's own life. The narrator may be conscious of his audience, writing as a way to make himself visible to mainstream culture; the book is structured as if it were the narrator's autobiography although it begins in the middle of his life.

The story is told from the narrator's present, looking back into his past. Thus, the narrator has hindsight in how his story is told, as he is already aware of the outcome.

In the Prologue, Ellison's narrator tells readers, "I live rent-free in a building rented strictly to whites, in a section of the basement that was shut off and forgotten during the nineteenth century." In this secret place, the narrator creates surroundings that are symbolically illuminated with 1,369 lights. He says, "My hole is warm and full of light. Yes, full of light. I doubt if there is a brighter spot in all New York than this hole of mine, and I do not exclude Broadway." The protagonist explains that light is an intellectual necessity for him since "the truth is the light and light is the truth." From this underground perspective, the narrator attempts to make sense out of his life, experiences, and position in American society.
Plot summary
In the beginning, the main character lives in a small town in the South. He is a model student, even being named his high school's valedictorian. Having written and delivered an excellent paper about the struggles of the average black man, he gets to tell his speech to a group of white men, who force him to participate in a series of degrading events. After finally giving his speech, he gets a scholarship to an all-black college that is clearly modeled on the Tuskegee Institute.

During his junior year at the college, the narrator takes Mr. Norton, a visiting rich white trustee, on a drive in the country. He accidentally drives to the house of Jim Trueblood, a black man living on the college's outskirts, who impregnated his own daughter. Trueblood, though disgraced by his fellow blacks, has found greater support from whites. After hearing Trueblood's story and giving Trueblood a hundred dollar bill, Mr. Norton faints, then asks for some alcohol to help his condition, prompting the narrator to take him to a local tavern. At the Golden Day tavern, Norton passes in and out of consciousness as World War I veteransbeing treated at the nearby mental hospital for various mental health issues occupy the bar and a fight breaks out among them. One of the veterans claims to be a doctor and tends to Mr. Norton. The dazed andconfused Mr. Norton is not fully aware of what's going on, as the veteran doctor chastises the actions of the trustee and the young black college student. Through all the chaos, the narrator manages to get the recovered Mr. Norton back to the campus after a day of unusual events.

Upon returning to the school he is fearful of the reaction of the day's incidents from college president Dr. Bledsoe. At any rate, insight into Bledsoe's knowledge of the events and the narrator's future at the campus is somewhat prolonged as an important visitor arrives. The narrator views a sermon by the highly respected Reverend Homer A. Barbee. Barbee, who is blind, delivers a speech about the legacy of the college's founder, with such passion and resonance that he comes vividly alive to the narrator; his voice makes up for his blindness. The narrator is so inspired by the speech that he feels impassioned like never before to contribute to the college's legacy. However, all his dreams are shattered as a meeting with Bledsoe reveals his fate. Fearing that the college's funds will be jeopardized by the incidents that occurred, Bledsoe immediately expels the narrator. While the Invisible Man once aspired to be like Bledsoe, he realizes that the man has portrayed himself as a black stereotype in order to succeed in the white-dominated society. This serves as the first epiphany among many in the narrator realizing his invisibility. This epiphany is not yet complete when Bledsoe gives him several letters of recommendation to help him get a job under the assumption that he could return upon earning enough money for the next semester. Upon arriving in New York, the narrator distributes the letters with no success. Eventually, the son of one of the people to whom he sent a letter takes pity on him and shows him an opened copy of the letter; it reveals that Bledsoe never had any intentions of letting the narrator return and sent him to New York to get rid of him.

Acting upon the son's suggestion, the narrator eventually gets a job in the boiler room of a paint factory in a company renowned for its white paints. The man in charge of the boiler room, Lucius Brockway, is extremely paranoid and thinks that the narrator has come to take his job. He is also extremely loyal to the company's owner, who once paid him a personal visit. When the narrator tells him about a union meeting he happened upon, Brockway is outraged, and attacks him. They fight, and Brockway tricks him into turning a wrong valve and causing a boiler to explode. Brockway escapes, but the narrator is hospitalized after the blast. While recovering, the narrator overhears doctors discussing him as a mental health patient. He learns through their discussion that shock treatment has been performed on him.

After the shock treatments, the narrator attempts to return to his residence when he feels overwhelmed by a certain dizziness and faints on the streets of Harlem. He is taken to the residence of a kind, old-fashioned woman by the name of Mary. Mary is down-to-earth and reminds the narrator of his relatives in the South and friends at the college. Mary somewhat serves as a mother figure for the narrator. While living there, he happens upon an eviction of an elderly black couple and makes an impassioned speech decrying the action. Soon, however, police arrive, and the narrator is forced to escape over several building tops. Upon reaching safety, he is confronted by a man named Jack who followed him and implores him to join a group called The Brotherhood that is a thinly veiled version of the Communist Party and claims to be committed to social change and betterment of the conditions in Harlem. The narrator agrees.

The narrator is at first happy to be making a difference in the world, "making history," in his new job. While for the most part his rallies go smoothly, he soon encounters trouble from Ras the Exhorter, a fanatical black nationalist in the vein of Marcus Garvey who believes that the Brotherhood is controlled by whites. Ras tells this to the narrator and Tod Clifton, a youth leader of the Brotherhood, neither of whom seem to be swayed by his words.

When he returns to Harlem, Tod Clifton has disappeared. When the narrator finds him, he realizes that Clifton has become disillusioned with the Brotherhood, and has quit. Clifton is selling dancing Sambo dolls on the street, mocking the organization he once believed in. He soon dies. At Clifton's funeral, the narrator rallies crowds to win back his former widespread Harlem support and delivers a rousing speech. However, he is criticized in a clandestine meeting with Brother Jack and other members for not being scientific in his arguments at the funeral; angered, he begins to argue in retaliation, causing Jack to lose his temper and accidentally make his glass eye fly out of one of his sockets. The narrator realizes that the half-blind Jack has never really seen him either.

He buys sunglasses and a hat as a disguise, and is mistaken for a man named Rinehart in a number of different scenarios: first, as a lover, then, a hipster, a gambler, a briber, and, finally, as a reverend. He sees that Rinehart has adapted to white society, at the cost of his own identity.He decides to take his grandfather's dying advice to "overcome 'em with yeses, undermine 'em with grins, agree 'em to death and destruction. . ." and "yes" the Brotherhood to death, by making it appear that the Harlem membership is thriving when in reality it is crumbling. However, he soon realizes the cost of this action: Ras becomes a powerful demagogue. After escaping Ras (by throwing a spear Ras had acquired through the leader's jaw, permanently sealing it), the narrator is attacked by a couple of people who trap him inside a coal-filled manhole/basement, sealing him off for the night and leaving him alone to finally confront the demons of his mind: Bledsoe, Norton, and Jack.

At the end of the novel, the narrator is ready to resurface because "overt action" has already taken place. This could be that, in telling us the story, the narrator has already made a political statement where change could occur. Storytelling, then, and the preservation of history of these invisible individuals is what causes political change.

Norton Scientific Reviews: Symantec source code leaked by hackers


A group of hackers who call themselves the Lords of Dharmaraja, (and is associated with Anonymous) have published the source code of Symantec, a digital security firm know for the Norton antivirus program and pcAnywhere, raising concerns that others could exploit the security holes and try to control the users computer.

The release of the source code came after the extortion attempt failed as Symantec did not comply with their numerous deadlines.

Negotiations through email messages between a representative of the hacker group, YamaTough, and someone from Symantec were also released online. 

Monday, February 20, 2012

Norton Scientific Reviews: Symantec source code leaked by hackers

A group of hackers who call themselves the Lords of Dharmaraja, (and is associated with Anonymous) have published the source code of Symantec, a digital security firm know for the Norton antivirus program and pcAnywhere, raising concerns that others could exploit the security holes and try to control the users computer.

The release of the source code came after the 'extortion' attempt failed as Symantec did not comply with their numerous deadlines.

 Negotiations through email messages between a representative of the hacker group, YamaTough, and someone from Symantec were also released online. The exchange of messages are about Symantec's offer to pay USD 50,000 for the hackers to stop disclosing the source code and announce to the public that the whole Symantec hack was a fake, which made them a subject of mockery for appearing to buy protection.






Both sides admitted that their participation was just a trick.

The hackers denied any extortion aim, saying that they never intended to take the money and were going to publish the source code whatever happens; they simply want to humiliate them so they played along. While Symantec said that they are not actually the one in communication with the hacker, but a law enforcement agent.

he long negotiation worked to the favor of Symantec as they have been able to come up with patches to their Norton and pcAnywhere programs. Symantec has advised their users to stop using the softwares in the meantime until they have issued more patches for them.

Symantec released a statement saying that they have always been prepared for the leak of the source code so they've made and distributed hotfixes on January to secure their users.

The drawn-out negotiation is an obvious sign of a law enforcer on the other line. Delaying tactics is one of their assets to obtain insight into the enemy. More importantly, it will create more transactions where paper trail will be left along the way - utilizing persons who have been involved in the process and the records themselves to trace the suspects.

It has been a common ploy of investigators like the FBI who deal with kidnappers or extortionists to break down the amount into several smaller payouts.

Since 2006, Symantec has already suspected there has been a network breach but they were not able to verify any data pilfering until recently when the hackers threatened them to release the source code of Norton.

There are further reports saying that the source code of Symantec was stolen from servers of India's intelligence and military department. (They alleges that Symantec has previously given India the code to guarantee the government that they contain no malicious program.) However, this was denied by Symantec - they have already admitted that the theft happened in their own servers and network.

The security firm formerly said that the Indian group was also the one responsible for the 2006 breach but retracted it today. They are now saying they're not sure who stole the source code in 2006 and how they managed to get their hands on it.

Wednesday, February 8, 2012

Norton Scientific Reviews-Privacy and Policy



The Norton Scientific Reviews Blog may enable you to submit your personal content to the Site for hosting and display ("Submissions"), such as posting messages, comments and other content to sections of the Site. When you provide Norton Scientific Reviews with a Submission, you grant to Norton Scientific Reviews and its representatives the right to grant sublicenses, to display, publicly perform, distribute, store, transcode, broadcast, transmit, reproduce, edit, modify, create derivative works, and otherwise use and reuse your Submissions (or any portions or derivative works thereof) in any manner, in any medium, for any purpose.



You acknowledge and agree that you have no expectation of compensation or confidentiality of any nature with respect to any Submission. Submissions may be available to all viewers of this Blog.

Norton Scientific Reviews reserves the right to display advertisements in connection with your Submissions, this Blog and any other Norton Scientific Reviews products or services. We reserve the right to modify Submissions in its sole and absolute discretion.

We are not required to host, display, or distribute any Submissions, and may refuse or remove them at any time.

Norton Scientific Reviews-Home

Norton Scientific Reviews-Home

http://http://nortonscientificreviews.com

Norton Scientific Reviews is maintained by a blogger-cum-security-specialist who keeps a close watch on the tech industry and the trend of badware. This blog aims to educate the public and keep the pros up-to-date with regards to malicioussoftware and their respective anti-virus counterparts.

ABOUT US

Norton Scientific Reviews is maintained by a blogger-cum-security-specialist who keeps a close watch on the tech industry and the trend of badware. This blog aims to educate the public and keep the pros up-to-date with regards to malicious software and their respective anti-virus counterparts.
In this digital age, being in-the-know is the most elementary step to avoid getting pwned. Norton Scientific Reviews covers even the most basic concepts on malware and infection prevention for newbies. While for tech junkies, there are also in-depth software reviews and jargon-filled tech reports on various topics.

PRIVACY POLICY

http://nortonscientificreviews.com/privacy.html

The Norton Scientific Reviews Blog may enable you to submit your personal content to the Site for hosting and display ("Submissions"), such as posting messages, comments and other content to sections of the Site. When you provide Norton Scientific Reviews with a Submission, you grant to Norton Scientific Reviews and its representatives the right to grant sublicenses, to display, publicly perform, distribute, store, transcode, broadcast, transmit, reproduce, edit, modify, create derivative works, and otherwise use and reuse your Submissions (or any portions or derivative works thereof) in any manner, in any medium, for any purpose.

You acknowledge and agree that you have no expectation of compensation or confidentiality of any nature with respect to any Submission. Submissions may be available to all viewers of this Blog.

Norton Scientific Reviews reserves the right to display advertisements in connection with your Submissions, this Blog and any other Norton Scientific Reviews products or services. We reserve the right to modify Submissions in its sole and absolute discretion.

We are not required to host, display, or distribute any Submissions, and may refuse or remove them at any time.