Игроки всегда ценят удобный и стабильный доступ к играм. Для этого идеально подходит зеркало Вавады, которое позволяет обходить любые ограничения, обеспечивая доступ ко всем бонусам и слотам. LeapWallet is a secure digital wallet that enables easy management of cryptocurrencies. With features like fast transactions and user-friendly interface, it's perfect for both beginners and experts. Check it out at leapwallet.lu.

Online Exclusive: How to Protect Yourself on Social Media

Add Friend on Social Media

In the October issue of Risk Management, social media and eDiscovery expert Adam Cohen chatted with me about the biggest corporate risks in sites like Facebook and Twitter, and outlined some best practices for developing and enforcing a social media policy. But behind every account sits one major risk that’s hard to control: a person.

Not all of Cohen’s advice could make the magazine, so here are some of his extra tips for how to mitigate the risks of personal social media – both to protect your company and to protect yourself.

What should employees know about their personal social media accounts?

All employees need to recognize one thing: they shouldn’t have any expectation of privacy in information that they post on social media. Even if they think they’re limiting information to a select group of friends, this stuff can all be disclosed in litigation and there are many cases where courts have required so-called non-public social media information to be disclosed. It’s fairly routine at this point.

Many employers – certainly all the major companies – have specific social media policies that give very particular and clear direction to employees on what they can and can’t do when it comes to company information on social media. That extends beyond just corporate social media and includes anything they’re doing on social media that could impact the company. And many employers are going to take the position that they have the right to monitor employees’ social media.

How can employees protect themselves?

buy lipitor online orthomich.com/img/blog/jpg/lipitor.html no prescription pharmacy

One of the key things employees need to do to protect themselves is only disclose information they would be comfortable disclosing to the entire world and they should not to go anywhere near business information. Being safe on this front may include publishing a disclaimer that an individual is not representing the views of the company. What else can they do? Follow the employer’s social media policy to the letter and, any time they have a question about whether one of their social media posts may be affected by the policy, they should ask. Most policies will provide a resource for questions, whether it’s a general counsel or a compliance officer or immediate supervisor.

Those are probably the main things: not having an expectation of privacy on social media and treating everything you post like it’s private, and following the policy to the letter and getting clarity and permission on anything that you think could be a violation of the policy.

As we’ve used social media more, do you think employees are using social media any more wisely?

I think it’s still too early to say that there are any improvements there. Litigation that involves social media as a factor in one form or another is just exploding. There is no information that would suggest in any way that employees have increasing awareness of this and are taking that into account when they go on social media.

What is the first thing you look for when trying to evaluate a social media account for potential liability or wrongdoing by an employee?

The first thing I would look for is the nexus between the social media and business information. Personal social media may be a concern from the perspective of the employee being seen as representing the company, even if it’s just sullying the reputation of the company – and that’s especially true the higher-ranking the employee is – but the first thing to look for is whether the employee discussing matters within the scope of their employment. And that’s difficult to monitor – the social media world is a big world, especially for a company with a lot of employees.

So then general personal misuse is relatively benign to you?

The other stuff is not benign at all. An employee who behaves in an inappropriate way on social media or is violating intellectual property rights, copyright or trademark of some other company – or, say, badmouthing a competitor – well, that’s not benign. If they’re engaged in criminal activity on social media or they’re defaming someone, that’s certainly not benign because they work for a company and that can impact the image of the company or lead to serious repercussions. That only gets more serious if you’re a prominent or higher-ranking executive.

buy arimidex online orthomich.com/img/blog/jpg/arimidex.html no prescription pharmacy

Is it benign? No, but you can’t control that.

Although, I should note, the National Labor Relations Board has said that employees have to be permitted to discuss their working conditions with other employees and that the employer can’t really control that, and if the social media policy purports to prohibit that discussion, the policy is not valid.

What is the most useful evidence in building a case against an employee?

Well, it depends on the kind of case, but social media has now been used as evidence in hundreds of cases. The most devastating use of it so far has probably been in the personal injury arena.

buy advair rotahaler online orthomich.com/img/blog/jpg/advair-rotahaler.html no prescription pharmacy

Plaintiffs have made claims of disability and emotional distress and the defendant has been able to obtain discovery or has retrieved public social media that completely contradicts those claims – for example, a video of the complainant surfing. There are a lot of cases like that and that’s just an example of really devastating use of social media.

Who do you friend at work?

Well, you don’t friend subordinates – that’s a no-no. You can get yourself into all kinds of trouble there with people making claims about what kind of a relationship you have with them. You don’t friend people at work whom you don’t know – just as you don’t in your personal life. You shouldn’t assume that, just because this person works with you, they’re the kind of person with whom you want to be associated. You also don’t want to friend somebody who you don’t want to have access to your social media. If you have privacy concerns, you want to maintain the upper limits of your reasonable expectation of privacy, so don’t friend people you’re afraid might use that access against you in an invasion of privacy.

Protecting the Enterprise Against Unconventional Competitive Social Risks

Today’s “social age” has brought many changes to the corporate world and increased the competitive threats enterprises have to deal with on an ongoing basis. Traditionally, competition has been upfront and direct with open head-to-head strategies to win customers and market share. But as the world approaches a complete “digital state” the competitive tactics against corporations have never been more threatening or aggressive.

As disruptive, non-traditional business competitors emerge, many of these organizations are adopting tactics that would typically be “off limits” to traditional corporations, including partnering with activist groups to attack and disrupt the market leader to damage the reputation and erode the financial state of the organization.

Many enterprises are no longer simply looking to compete, but actually to protect their operations against the disruptive, aggressive forces these non-traditional competitors are partnering with. To combat these unconventional tactics, traditional corporations are turning to real-time advanced social intelligence to receive deep, multidimensional insight on the tactics and actions.

Disruptive Forces

With the proliferation of social media channels and mobile technology, competition for corporations is no longer limited to large, traditional competitors. Technology has allowed a generation of young entrepreneurs to compete with the proverbial Goliath, and quite effectively in many cases. However, in order to gain a competitive foothold in the battle for market share, many small, aggressive companies are targeting their colossal, traditional counterparts across the open social universe, engaging a variety of tactics. The objectives of these emerging competitors are often to dramatically disrupt the market and its leaders and to damage, if not destroy their financial state and reputations.

One example of these emerging disruptors is SodaStream, which is targeting the 178-year-old U.S. carbonated beverage industry with their home soda machines. The company’s focus is to completely disrupt the traditional soda beverage market by convincing consumers to make their own carbonated beverages at home. One of SodaStream’s major tactics is to focus on their product’s elimination of plastic bottles, which they target as an environmental threat.

Creating Disruption with Activists

To maximize this strategic disruption, SodaStream opted to partner with Alex Bogusky, the former co-chairman of ad agency Crispin, Porter + Bogusky, which ironically designed and developed ads for Coke Zero during his tenure. Now an activist against the beverage industry, Bogusky is known for developing widespread activist campaigns against the carbonated beverage industry for health and environmental causes.

As an example of his work, Bogusky has developed viral videos, like one entitled “Real Bears” that chastises his former client, Coca-Cola, using their iconic polar bears to make statements on the health effects, like diabetes and high blood pressure, of soda consumption. Bogusky distributed these videos with the Center for Science in the Public Interest, a self-described non-profit watchdog and consumer advocacy group focusing on nutritional education and awareness. To date his “Real Bears” video has had over 2.2 million views on YouTube.

SodaStream turned to Bogusky to create their 2013 Super Bowl ad targeting soda manufacturers for the amount of plastic bottles they produce. The ad directly attacks the beverage industry’s market leaders with exploding bottles as consumers use SodaStream’s product, saying, “With SodaStream, we could have saved 500 million bottles on gameday alone.” While one SodaStream ad submission was aired, another that directly showed Coca-Cola and Pepsi was rejected by CBS.

Bogusky’s activism approach delivers SodaStream a direct, aggressive channel that many traditional competitors do not employ. Bogusky also affords SodaStream the opportunity to leverage his extensive, sympathetic social network, which features a wide array of activists targeting a variety causes against the beverage industry’s leading providers, ranging from portion size, bottle elimination and sugars to soda taxes and an array of health issues. This network spans activists and advocates across the media, academic, health and corporate sectors, which Bogusky leverages to bring further pressure against the beverage market’s leaders, providing a greater advantage for SodaStream. This direct, aggressive approach poses a huge financial risk for the market leaders who have been battling for carbonated beverage industry supremacy for nearly half a century.

Unveiling the Activist Network

Half the challenge of mitigating risk is having the ability to identify it. The complexity of these competitive forces can be very challenging to pinpoint and understand. However, as companies are now faced with the critical need to gain insight into these new types of veiled, aggressive competitive threats, more enterprises are turning to advanced social intelligence to identify, map and track these threats both individually and collectively to help guide their strategic direction and decisions.

Mapping the activist partners of SodaStream unveils a massive “stealth” network that is often, knowingly or unknowingly, supporting the efforts against SodaStream’s competitors. The example below unveils Bogusky’s massive sympathetic activist network focused on damaging the reputation and financial state of beverage industry leaders, which provides a collective reach to tens of millions of consumers to distribute their damaging messages.

Despite their differing focuses, most of these individual activists share a common objective to damage, or even destroy the major providers of carbonated beverages, which is an objective they share with SodaStream.

Achieving Advanced Competitive Intelligence

Corporations are no longer faced with only traditional, direct competitors. Rather, companies have to understand the emerging disruptive competitors that will often join forces with individual aggressive activists and their massive sympathetic networks to damage their business, engaging unconventional tactics to disrupt industries that have traditionally been unmovable.

To gain this type of advanced insight on a corporation’s disruptive competitors and the activists who may be working in concert to damage them, the organization needs the ability to filter, classify and analyze billions of daily open social discussions to extract invaluable on-going insight. This insight delivers multidimensional competitive views previously unavailable to the corporation to drive strategic decision-making. It is not always effective enough for corporations to rely on simplistic keyword lists and basic tools that “listen” to narrow samples of the social landscape. To manage the widespread financial and reputational threats, the enterprise has to process the entire open social universe, using measure that includes sophisticated “big data” processing tools and analysis from digital media experts.

This advanced social intelligence facilitates proactive planning and strategic response to effectively combat these competitive forces, allowing businesses to protect themselves and their employees, their market share and even their industry itself.

Credit Card Hack Could Cost $80 Million in Illinois

A massive credit card breach at a Missouri-based grocery store chain could end up cost $80 million in Illinois alone, according to a court motion filed last week. So far, at least three lawsuits seeking class action status have been filed against Schnucks Markets, Inc., alleging a breach that has affected 2.

online pharmacy xenical with best prices today in the USA

4 million cards used at 79 stores between early December and late March.

As the St. Louis Dispatch reports:

The suits allege that Schnucks knew about the breach days, perhaps longer, before it revealed the hack, and should have told customers about it sooner. The suit filed in Illinois on April 25 says the breach cost customers time and money, requiring card holders to spend hours canceling and getting replacement cards, and re-setting automatic payments.

In its motion, filed Friday, Schnucks puts a figure on this effort, saying that an estimated 1.6 million card transactions took places at its 23 Illinois stores during the breach period, representing 500,000 unique cards — about one-fifth of the cards compromised in the breach overall.

online pharmacy imodium with best prices today in the USA

Plaintiffs argue that state law in Missouri and Illinois says that any store that stores personal data relating to customers must notify those customers as soon as the store becomes aware of a breach. Schnucks, however, says that the data stolen from customer credit cards included card numbers and expiration dates, not names, meaning they were not required to notify victims. It can be said that this looks bad on Schnucks — customer service-wise and reputation-wise.

The case is likely to head to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois.

Relatively speaking, $80 million is nothing compared to, say, the Heartland Payments Systems security breach of 2008, which resulted in the theft of information from more than 100 million credit and debit cards and a 20-year prison sentence for the perpetrator. But even that doesn’t compare to this list of the top five most expensive data breaches.

Don’t Get Careless with Your Passwords

With stories of identity theft and data breaches hitting the news on an almost constant basis, it’s no wonder that we all get a little tired of hearing how about how at risk we are from the prying eyes of cybercriminals. Of course, if you’re the victim of some sort of hacking incident, you’ll probably wish you paid more attention. The problem is that we have passwords for everything and keeping track of all of them is a giant hassle.

As the following infographic from security software provider ZoneAlarm demonstrates, this password fatigue tends to make us a little careless and puts us at greater risk. A strong password is the front line to keeping your data safe, so old standbys like “password” and “12345” are not going to cut it. There are many helpful guides out there for creating secure passwords that you can actually remember, so maybe it’s time to choose a new strategy. It certainly beats cleaning the bathroom (regardless of what 38% of people said below).

 

Managing Logins