A study commissioned by Web security company AVG Technologies and the Chief Marketing Officers Council (CMO) points out an interesting contradiction between people's concerns and actions regarding security risks on social networking sites.
The summary report says that "while the majority of social networking users are afflicted by web-borne security problems, less than one third are taking actions to protect themselves online."
Unfortunately, the data provided to the media as of Tuesday afternoon says very little about the study's methodology, lacks the actual questions asked, and in some cases lacks the actual percentages of responses. It did, however, say that the data is based on "responses from a random sampling of more than 250 consumers." It was conducted online during second quarter of 2009. The report didn't specify how they developed a random sampling--a difficult task for Web-based surveys. In addition to the small sample size, it's not clear how they derived the sample and whether it was truly representative of the population they were studying.
As someone who has studied, taught, and conducted survey research, I am disappointed by how little information was provided to the media about the methodology and specific results of this study. However, with that caveat, I still think the data is interesting and worth reporting.
Participants, according to the summary, "indicated concern over growing phishing, spam and malware attacks, and nearly half of those surveyed are very concerned about their personal identity being stolen in an online community." The report said that "nearly 20 percent experienced identity theft" but didn't define identify theft. An AVG spokesperson told me that it means impersonation online, not the typical definition that almost always involves financial fraud. A CMO spokesperson said it was based on a concern that users could download malware on social-networking sites, which could lead to identity theft and other problems.
Online impersonation can result in financial fraud but often is used as a form of cyberbullying to embarrass someone or make them look as if they said something they didn't really say. It can also be used as part of a scam to get a "friend" of the person being impersonated to send money to help their "friend" who claims to be stranded in a foreign country or otherwise in trouble. As per malware--that too is true. Malware, however it is distributed, can install keyloggers that can capture confidential information that can lead to identity theft.
In the survey, 47 percent of the respondents said they "have been victims of malware infections" and "55 percent have seen phishing attacks." What isn't clear is whether the infections or phishing attacks are from social-networking sites or some other source. It is possible for malware to be distributed through social-networking sites, often in the form of links to Web sites that contain malicious code, but there are plenty of other ways to get it. Social-networking sites could be used for phishing attacks, but phishing usually comes via e-mail. To say that users of social-networking sites have been exposed to phishing and malware would be like saying that most people who eat spinach are likely to have had measles when they were children. There is a correlation, but no evidence of causality.
The study also reported that most of the 86 percent of the sample who said they use social-networking sites "fail to perform the following basic security measures on a regular basis," including changing passwords (64 percent infrequently or never), adjusting privacy settings (57 percent infrequently or never) or "informing their social network administrator on security issues." The report didn't specify what a "social networking administrator" is. In my house it's me, but an AVG spokesperson said that the report was likely referring to the "report abuse" links provided by most social-networking sites.
The survey also found that 21 percent accept contact offerings from members they don't recognize, "more than half let acquaintances or roommates access social networks on their machines, 64 percent click on links offered by community members or contacts and 26 percent share files.
AVG recommends that social networking users:
1. Don't accept pop-ups or prompts for software unless you're armed with Web scanner software such as AVG's free LinkScanner
2. Don't post or submit confidential personal data
3. Change password at least once per month
4. Don't let others access their social networks on your computer
5. Don't auto save your password, and clear your history at least weekly
6. Don't accept friend requests or request friends that you don't know
Mostly good advice
I certainly agree that it's a very bad idea to post confidential information, even if you limit access to your profile to people who really are friends. I don't even like using e-mail to send out anything confidential--digital information has a way of being copied and friends can sometimes become ex-friends.
I also agree with the suggestion not to autosave passwords and to periodically clear your Web history and strongly agree that all Windows users have up-to-date malware-detection software.
While a terrific idea, it's unrealistic to expect people to change their passwords monthly though, as I pointed out in a recent post, it is important for social networkers to have very strong passwords and consider using a password manager like LastPass.
The advice to not let others use your computer is also unrealistic. Some people have to share a computer at home or at work and few of us would turn down a friend's request to sit at our computer a few minutes to check their social-networking profile.
As per accepting friend requests from strangers, it depends how you use your social-networking page. I accept all friend requests on Facebook but never post anything that I wouldn't publish in a newspaper or say on radio or TV. If you use your social-networking site to share personal information, then AVG is right--be careful who you accept as a friend and even then, be cautious about what you post.
Cheating is cheating regardless of whether you use technology or old-fashioned paper notes. I'm appalled that kids may be using technology to cheat in school, but I'm just as appalled at how schools are cheating kids when it comes to technology.
But in addition to admonishing kids about why it's wrong to cheat, perhaps it's also time to rethink what it means to evaluate students in the age of the Internet and omnipresent mobile devices.
(Credit:
Common Sense Media)
The survey, which was conducted by Benenson Strategy Group for Common Sense Media, found that "41 percent (of seventh- to 12th-graders) say that storing notes on a cell phone to access during tests is cheating and a serious offense, while 23 percent don't think it's cheating at all." Similarly, 45 percent say "texting friends about answers during a test" is cheating, while 20 percent do not consider it cheating. More than a third (36 percent) said that downloading a paper from the Internet to turn in was not a serious cheating offense and nearly one-fifth didn't consider it to be cheating at all. Just more than half the kids admitted to using the Internet for some form of cheating,
As a parent and former educator, I am strongly opposed to any type of cheating. And there is no way that anyone--not just students--should get away with claiming authorship on a paper they didn't write. But this survey might also present an opportunity for educators to re-evaluate the type of tests they're giving. I think there is a role for tests that measure a student's ability to quickly acquire and interpret information through mobile devices, even if they know nothing about the subject prior to sitting down for the test.
I'm not making a universal declaration that every kid should be issued a smart phone or iPod Touch to help them with every test they take. But I do think that the emergence of cheap mobile technology and--eventually--omnipresent connectivity offer educators an opportunity to incorporate the technology into their classrooms and even testing.
As Peggy Sheehy, a library media specialist from Suffern, N.Y., put it: "We can't teach 21st century literacy and assess with 19th century methodology. We have to look at what we really need students to be able to do when they leave us" and we must ask, "what is my student learning outside of school and how can I get them just as engaged?"
Right now, it's a valid point to say that letting kids access mobile devices may discriminate against those who can't afford the phones or the service. Yet that will change, just as it did with electronic calculators, as these devices become even more affordable, especially if students can access free wireless networks at school.
In the work force, what's important in most situations is not so much the facts you can pull out of your head but your ability to acquire information when you need it and--most importantly--your ability to make sense of it.
I'm not saying being able to recall facts from memory is never important. I have to do that nearly every day when I go on live radio. And I often use the Internet to acquire facts only moments before the broadcast and have occasionally had to look up a fact while taking on live radio. What's most important is not my regurgitation of the facts but my interpretation. The ability to put things into context is hard to measure with the types of multiple choice tests that are commonly used in schools.
Of course, the ability to use a search engine is no substitute for kids learning how to critically evaluate the information they do acquire. Knowing how to judge the authority of a source and being able to interpret the meaning of information--in the long run--is more important than the ability to remember it.
A few years ago I participated in a conference with educators from the U.S. and Japan. Both groups had their gripes about their country's educational system, but what I heard from several of my Japanese colleagues was the concern that their system concentrated too much on rote memory and not enough on creativity and critical thinking.
David Ricky Matsumoto, author of "The New Japan," said the same thing those educators told me: "In my experience," he wrote in the book, "the typical Japanese student excels at learning facts and figures. "...what many Japanese students lack is the ability to think about problems creatively, critically, and autonomously."
So, while we should continue to discourage cheating of any kind, we should also encourage schools to find creative ways to use technology, including cell phones, in the learning process and in the testing process. It's called adaptation. And besides, progress should always be a part of a progressive educational system.
This post is adapted from a column that appeared in the San Jose Mercury News.
- prev
- 1
- next
