dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
876
share rss forum feed


antdude
A Ninja Ant
Premium,VIP
join:2001-03-25
United State
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable

1 recommendation

Mozilla Recognized as Most Trusted Internet Company--Privacy

»blog.mozilla.org/blog/2013/01/28···ay-2013/ -- "... Mozilla has been named the Most Trusted Internet Company for Privacy in 2012, according to a study performed by the Ponemon Institute..."


jaykaykay
4 Ever Young
Premium,MVM
join:2000-04-13
USA
kudos:24
Reviews:
·Cox HSI
·Speakeasy
Hmmmmmmmm. This is the response I get to clicking on your link. I have no problem reading the article via a proxy, however.

There is a problem with this website's security certificate.

The security certificate presented by this website was issued for a different website's address.

Security certificate problems may indicate an attempt to fool you or intercept any data you send to the server.
We recommend that you close this webpage and do not continue to this website.
Click here to close this webpage.
Continue to this website (not recommended).
More information

If you arrived at this page by clicking a link, check the website address in the address bar to be sure that it is the address you were expecting.
When going to a website with an address such as »example.com, try adding the 'www' to the address, »www.example.com.
If you choose to ignore this error and continue, do not enter private information into the website.

For more information, see "Certificate Errors" in Internet Explorer Help.


--
JKK

Age is a very high price to pay for my maturity. If I can't stay young, I can at least stay immature!

»www.pbase.com/jaykaykay



antdude
A Ninja Ant
Premium,VIP
join:2001-03-25
United State
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
said by jaykaykay:

Hmmmmmmmm. This is the response I get to clicking on your link. I have no problem reading the article via a proxy, however.

There is a problem with this website's security certificate.

The security certificate presented by this website was issued for a different website's address.

Security certificate problems may indicate an attempt to fool you or intercept any data you send to the server.
We recommend that you close this webpage and do not continue to this website.
Click here to close this webpage.
Continue to this website (not recommended).
More information

If you arrived at this page by clicking a link, check the website address in the address bar to be sure that it is the address you were expecting.
When going to a website with an address such as »example.com, try adding the 'www' to the address, »www.example.com.
If you choose to ignore this error and continue, do not enter private information into the website.

For more information, see "Certificate Errors" in Internet Explorer Help.


Weird. I have no problems at work and home with SeaMonkey v2.15.1 web browsers.
--
Ant @ AQFL.net and AntFarm.ma.cx. Please do not IM/e-mail me for technical support. Use this forum or better, »community.norton.com ! Disclaimer: The views expressed in this posting are mine, and do not necessarily reflect the views of my employer.

evoxllx

join:2007-06-07
Winter Park, FL
reply to jaykaykay
said by jaykaykay:

Hmmmmmmmm. This is the response I get to clicking on your link. I have no problem reading the article via a proxy, however.

There is a problem with this website's security certificate.

The security certificate presented by this website was issued for a different website's address.

Security certificate problems may indicate an attempt to fool you or intercept any data you send to the server.
We recommend that you close this webpage and do not continue to this website.
Click here to close this webpage.
Continue to this website (not recommended).
More information

If you arrived at this page by clicking a link, check the website address in the address bar to be sure that it is the address you were expecting.
When going to a website with an address such as »example.com, try adding the 'www' to the address, »www.example.com.
If you choose to ignore this error and continue, do not enter private information into the website.

For more information, see "Certificate Errors" in Internet Explorer Help.


blog.mozilla.org requires SNI support for HTTPS to work properly.

You must have an extremely outdated OS/browser, or your configuration is messed up.

See the list below:
»en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Server_Nam···ent_side


jaykaykay
4 Ever Young
Premium,MVM
join:2000-04-13
USA
kudos:24
Old browser and OS.


goalieskates
Premium
join:2004-09-12
land of big
reply to antdude
What is the Ponemon Institute, and why would I care?


pizz
1gbps is all the rage.
Premium
join:2000-10-27
Astoria, NY
Reviews:
·Time Warner Cable
reply to antdude
i agree. Mozilla, is an awesome company. I've donate some monetary funds to them. I hope they continue what they're doing, and not goto the darkside!
--
It's ok to say, 'I don't know'. It's even better when someone takes the time to explain what you, 'don't know'.
Expand your moderator at work


ashrc4
Premium
join:2009-02-06
australia

2 edits
reply to goalieskates

Re: Mozilla Recognized as Most Trusted Internet Company--Privacy

said by goalieskates:

What is the Ponemon Institute, and why would I care?

Their PDF clearly answers that for you;

Ponemon Institute’s Most Trusted Companies for Privacy Study1 is an objective study that asks
consumers to name and rate organizations they believe are most committed to protecting the
privacy of their personal information. This annual study tracks consumers’
rankings of organizations that collect and manage their personal information.
More than 100,000 adult-aged consumers were asked to name up to five
companies they believe to be the most trusted for protecting the privacy of their
personal information. Consumer responses were gathered over a 15-week
period concluding in December 2012 and resulted in a final sample of 6,704
respondents who, on average, provided 5.4 discernible company ratings that
represent 25 different industries

We believe this research provides an unambiguous measure of how consumers perceive the
privacy and personal data protection practices of specific organizations. While perception is not a
perfect substitute for reality, in our experience this aggregated consumer view is an important
indicator.
We offer a cautionary note about the results of this year’s study. Based on previous consumer
studies, we have found that consumer perceptions about privacy can be influenced by a number
of extraneous factors. In fact, the ratings may not reflect at all the actual privacy practices of the
company and its efforts to protect the personal information of its customers and employees.
Further, what a company does in the area of privacy and data protection can be invisible to the
consumer until he or she experiences a problem and seeks redress or has a question about the
organization’s privacy and data protection practices that needs to be answered.
Some factors influencing consumers’ perceptions about a company’s privacy commitments may
include opinions about brand or product, personal experiences with a website, and how well the
company’s advertising messages resonate with them. In addition, favorable privacy trust
perceptions may result when a customer receives exceptional value from goods or services
received. We also believe media coverage of companies experiencing data breach or other
negative stories can significantly influence privacy trust perceptions.

»www.ponemon.org/local/upload/fil···INAL.pdf

You might care if you were a company given the results ahead of it's official release, maybe......Or it had a stronger overall weight on company's concerned with how/what privacy illusions the public had and then encouraged them to improve


goalieskates
Premium
join:2004-09-12
land of big

1 edit
said by ashrc4:

You might care if you were a company given the results ahead of it's official release, maybe......Or it had a stronger overall weight on company's concerned with how/what privacy illusions the public had and then encouraged them to improve

Or not. I think you're missing my point (although I was trying to be succinct).

There are some polls and pronouncements that have no meaning to real users, but are used as glorifications by the "winners." We've all seen them - browser x is "the fastest" or "the best", etc. Puff pieces that have no impact in the real world but they sure feel good.

There are also a lot of bogus groups that have wonderful "about us" statements on their web sites - they sound good, even the crooks. So their own mission statement isn't really an indicator of how respected they are in the IT community.

Non-tech example so we don't all get bogged down in a tech debate: The city where I live was recently touted by Reuters to be one of only three "major" cities to see economic recovery. The mayor promptly took credit and did a big pr tapdance in the media. The only problems with that are, that (a) it's not a major city by any stretch, and (b) you have to really twist the numbers to come up with any kind of recovery. Unemployment is still high, major jobs have been lost, and their replacements have been of the minimum wage variety. The article was a crock, or maybe a pr stunt, who knows. Other cities in the state that are both bigger and have better jobs somehow didn't "improve" the same way. Go figure.

So returning to this "achievement", Mozilla is acting like they won something because it makes them look good. If someone else had "won," they'd be the one crowing. But if the average person or company doesn't recognize and respect the source, it's no more real than my city's "recovery."


Blackbird
Built for Speed
Premium
join:2005-01-14
Fort Wayne, IN
kudos:3
Reviews:
·Frontier Communi..

1 recommendation

said by goalieskates:

... So returning to this "achievement", Mozilla is acting like they won something because it makes them look good. If someone else had "won," they'd be the one crowing. But if the average person or company doesn't recognize and respect the source, it's no more real than my city's "recovery."

I respectfully disagree. When it comes to Internet privacy and trust, the average person most likely won't recognize any source that awards a company's privacy and trust achievements. Not necessarily because such awards are flaky, undeserved, or not real, but simply because most folks have no idea of who is a knowledgeable-enough organization to make a legitimate award. Many professional or trade organizations are top-notch and legitimate, as are their awards, though they're not necessarily "well-known" to the average person. Frankly, I personally have little direct experience with the Ponemon Institute's competency or legitimacy, but I certainly can't dismiss them out-of-hand. From what I understand about them, they (and their RIM Council) appear to be recognized organizations framed around promoting and setting standards for privacy and ethics in all manner of information-rich industries and professions.
--
“The American Republic will endure until the day Congress discovers that it can bribe the public with the public's money.” A. de Tocqueville


Phoenix22
Death From Above
Premium
join:2001-12-11
SOG C&C Nrth
Reviews:
·Comcast Formerl..
reply to antdude
said by antdude:

»blog.mozilla.org/blog/2013/01/28···ay-2013/ -- "... Mozilla has been named the Most Trusted Internet Company for Privacy in 2012, according to a study performed by the Ponemon Institute..."

the link is fine w/ff 18.0.1
--
101ST ABN Div. (AirAssault) "Rendezvous With Destiny!" "Night Stalkers/Phoenix Flight" For Buddy...who lived it! Whiskey for my men and beer for my horses! H.A.L.O!, 5th Grp., MACV SOG, 160TH AVN SOG, Death From Above, VFW, AmLegion


Name Game
Premium
join:2002-07-07
Grand Rapids, MI
kudos:7
reply to antdude
I'll stick with the one most secure .

»www.thesurvivalistblog.net/secur···browser/


ashrc4
Premium
join:2009-02-06
australia
reply to goalieskates
said by goalieskates:

said by ashrc4:

You might care if you were a company given the results ahead of it's official release, maybe......Or it had a stronger overall weight on company's concerned with how/what privacy illusions the public had and then encouraged them to improve


I think you're missing my point (although I was trying to be succinct).

No got it loud and clear.
The perceived privacy survey does not account for actual levels of privacy attained by comparison of company's and therefore people should not use it in some of the methods of comparison and champion one company over another with it.
said by ashrc4:

Or it had a stronger overall weight on company's concerned with how/what privacy illusions the public had and then encouraged them to improve

It still has some uses and could be a positive thing if one can vouch for it's accuracy.
--
Paradigm Shift beta test pilot. "Dying to defend one's small piece of suburb...Give me something global...STAT!