×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Mozilla Named 'Most Trusted Internet Company For Privacy'

Soulskill posted about a year ago | from the email-us-your-credit-card-details-if-you-agree dept.

Mozilla 70

redletterdave writes "Mozilla announced on Tuesday that it has been named the 'Most Trusted Internet Company For Privacy' in 2012, according to a new independent study released by the Ponemon Institute early this morning (PDF). Ponemon Institute surveyed more than 100,000 adult-aged consumers over a 15-week period ending in December 2012; of the 6,704 respondents, representing 25 different industries, Mozilla was ranked the top Internet and social media company. While this is a great achievement for Mozilla, especially considering this was their first year making the list, Mozilla's team took note of the fact that 'Internet and social media' was still the least trustworthy sector out of the 25 total industries listed. 'It means we as an industry all have a lot more work to do,' Mozilla wrote on its blog."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

70 comments

Isn't that like winning the "Best Lohan" Award? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42731831)

Just saying

Re:Isn't that like winning the "Best Lohan" Award? (1)

Desler (1608317) | about a year ago | (#42731885)

Or the "least skanky crackwhore".

Re:Isn't that like winning the "Best Lohan" Award? (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42731889)

That's the same award.

Re:Isn't that like winning the "Best Lohan" Award? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42732255)

Shouldn't you be off trolling Usenet ...

Re:Isn't that like winning the "Best Lohan" Award? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42733215)

More likely planning the marketing for Win9.

Slashdot is a Burson Marsteller echo chamber now. Hardly any real humans left.

Hehe (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42731849)

Ponemon? Do I gotta catch them all?

Re:Hehe (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42732607)

Sounds like some godless abomination created by a brony festering in the depths of Deviantart.

I skimmed the PDF... (3, Insightful)

TWX (665546) | about a year ago | (#42731891)

...and it's all about perception and how people feel, not how the world actually works. Therefore, it may give people fuzzy/happy feelings, but it doesn't necessarily mean squat if it's not actually correct.

This is the Peoples' Choice Awards of privacy and security. And remember, when you think of how stupid the average person is, bear in mind that 50% are below that.

Re:I skimmed the PDF... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42732055)

when you think of how stupid the average person is, bear in mind that 50% are below that.

What you describe is (roughly) the median stupidity. Using just the mean stupidity, you can't tell what percentage of individuals is below or above. (You have to account for extraordinarily stupid or bright people.) /nitpick

Re:I skimmed the PDF... (1)

EvanED (569694) | about a year ago | (#42732181)

It's a good thing that "average" has only one meaning which is shared with "arithmetic mean."

Re:I skimmed the PDF... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42732209)

Technically correct but actually wrong.

Since intelligence falls on a normal distribution, the mean and median end up being the same.

Re:I skimmed the PDF... (1)

Kjella (173770) | about a year ago | (#42733035)

Technically correct but actually wrong. Since intelligence falls on a normal distribution, the mean and median end up being the same.

It doesn't fall on a normal distribution, it is normalized to give an IQ score. It's like taking the time on the 100m dash and say "You run faster than X% of the population", but it doesn't say how fast you run relative to anyone else or how quickly you'd move up or down the list of results. The reason is that we can order people by how much they answer correctly but we have no objective measure of how much smarter they had to be in order to do it.

Re:I skimmed the PDF... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42732069)

s/average/median

Then your assertion would be true.

Re:I skimmed the PDF... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42733651)

Median is a type of average, and is in fact the average that people talk about when using distributions like intelligence.

A lot of you computer nobbers seem to think that average=mean, but that's simply not true in normal speech. When someone talks about "the average person" they almost exclusively intend "median" - since the mean number of legs say, is about 1.999 (none have more than 2, insert penis joke here, but many have less, therefore the mean must be under 2), the mean number of appendices is about 0.95 etc But I'd say that the "average" person has 2 legs, for example.

But of course, for the wanker who just wants to score some points on being technically correct, this gets missed. So how's about not being such a wanker in future because you look doubly stupid when someone has to point this out to you.

Re:I skimmed the PDF... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42732143)

Given that Mozilla is the only browser maker that is not a for-profit company, maybe the people aren't so stupid.

I'm not saying all for-profit companies are evil, but their ultimate goal is to make money, and that can easily conflict with protecting users' privacy.

The profit motive gets you companies like IBTimes.com (one of the links in the summary) that auto plays videos, and restarts those videos if you stop them. (I'm baffled why SoulSkill would have included an IBTimes link in the summary.)

Re:I skimmed the PDF... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42737409)

Given that Mozilla is the only browser maker that is not a for-profit company, maybe the people aren't so stupid.

I'm not saying all for-profit companies are evil, but their ultimate goal is to make money, and that can easily conflict with protecting users' privacy.

So true it hurts. Wondering why this is festering at zero.

Re:I skimmed the PDF... (2)

Skewray (896393) | about a year ago | (#42732251)

...and it's all about perception and how people feel, not how the world actually works. Therefore, it may give people fuzzy/happy feelings, but it doesn't necessarily mean squat if it's not actually correct.

Well, the Ponemon Institute brought us Pikachu, which makes me feel pretty fuzzy/happy about Mozilla.

Re:I skimmed the PDF... (-1, Flamebait)

yfrdtyid (2827823) | about a year ago | (#42732265)

http://www.cloud65.com/ [cloud65.com] my best friend's step-sister makes $72/hour on the internet. She has been out of work for ten months but last month her payment was $16793 just working on the internet for a few hours. Go to this web site and read more

Re:I skimmed the PDF... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42732345)

Yeah? Well, my best friend's step-sister's brother's pet-sitter's mother make $144/hour on the internet, and didn't have to click your stupid scam link to do it!

Re:I skimmed the PDF... (2)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | about a year ago | (#42732893)

Given that Firefox isn't an advertising company or someone with a second rate search engine and trying to be number 1 by snooping on your searches there is a valid case for them being better.

For security, Chrome has more vulnerabilities than Firefox, it's up with IE. Google and Microsoft hold more data on you worth stealing so you're going to be more valuable target.

Re:I skimmed the PDF... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42734255)

Mozilla gets most of their income from Google, and the Googlites are dedicated to preventing privacy wherever possible. Further, by default, privacy settings in Firefox are hidden and 3rd party cookies (read "spyware") are enabled.

Re:I skimmed the PDF... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42734263)

Try skimming their Privacy Policy and TOS and comparing it to Google and Microsoft. Granted there's always room for improvement but this distinction of "most trusted" is warranted.

Re:I skimmed the PDF... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42735617)

Was going to say, Mozilla is the company that forces you to opt out of tracking giving the same fluffy nonsensical excuse that the ad industry wanted them to give about how they wont honor it if it's opt in, even though they've said they wont actually honor it anyway meaning Mozilla would as everyone who didn't fall for the ad industry spiel have been better to automatically opt people out of tracking because at least then users have something to take to the courts, or in the EU, something the EU can hold up to the industry and say look, you tracked them without their permission.

Mozilla is in bed with the ad companies, not a company I'd exactly say is really trustworthy in terms of privacy when they opt you in to being tracked by default using an excuse that makes absolutely zero sense.

Re:I skimmed the PDF... (1)

fatphil (181876) | about a year ago | (#42735851)

Indeed. If it didn't appear last year, and this year it's number one, and Mozilla hasn't significantly changed any privacy policies in the last year, that tells me that the rankings are basically more noise than signal.

Re:I skimmed the PDF... (1)

Jane Q. Public (1010737) | about a year ago | (#42747559)

I think a lot of it is, as someone else wrote in part, the simple fact that Firefox is the major independent (i.e., not affiliated with an OS or search company) browser. Opera was pretty much independent too, last I checked, but they don't have the penetration that Firefox does.

On that basis, I'm willing to give it security points. Since they do not have a vested interest in selling your information or locking you into an OS, they are likely to have consumer interest a bit more in mind than the others.

Re:I skimmed the PDF... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42740163)

Of course it is about perceptions and how people feel, you can tell the from the bloody title, you didn't need to even read the summary let alone the pdf to work that out There's a key word in the title, "trusted", and trust is always based on perceptions and feelings, smart people may use information to moderate their perceptions and feelings of trust, but it is still perceptions and feelings.

I have the need the need for speed (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42731911)

Sure they protect your privacy now work on browser speed. http://lifehacker.com/browser-speed-tests/

I started using Chrome and never looked back. It is so much faster and syncs my bookmarks with my login and not some horrible password system.

Pokemon Institute? (0)

lorinc (2470890) | about a year ago | (#42731951)

I mean, seriously?

Re:Pokemon Institute? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42732227)

If you can't trust the people who stuff wild animals into tiny plastic capsules and force them to fight while feeding them combat drugs, who can you trust?

Re:Pokemon Institute? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42732277)

What I like best about Slashdot is that I can come here, misread something, and know that someone else has already made a comment saying that they misread it too.

Re:Pokemon Institute? (2)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | about a year ago | (#42732863)

Yes, seriously. Professor Oak did a LOT of research before dispatching Brock, Misty, and Ash to Firefox World Headquarters with the news.

Unfortunately, Team Rocket got there first, and Jesse, disguised in a suit, was waiting for them in Mitchell Baker's office. Things got a bit dicey for a while... but let's just say that, in the end, Team Rocket blasted off again.

Re:Pokemon Institute? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42737449)

Well, one of the cute original pokemon was a multi-tailed fire-element fox.

Microsoft ranked higher than Mozilla (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42731963)

For companies overall:
Microsoft #17
Mozilla #20

Re:Microsoft ranked higher than Mozilla (1)

manu0601 (2221348) | about a year ago | (#42734333)

For companies overall: Microsoft #17 Mozilla #20

Yes, I saw that. This is surprising; Anyone can explain why one could have more trust in Microsoft, a for-profit company, than in non-profit Mozilla foundation? At least Mozilla does not have a financial interest to betray its users

Re:Microsoft ranked higher than Mozilla (1)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | about a year ago | (#42734391)

That's easy. 90% of the market believes that a computer can't run without a Microsoft ritual blessing. With that godly blessing, computers are safe. It's a cult thing, really - get your WGA approval, run your updates, and everything is fine in computer heaven.

Whether that faith is warranted or not is subject for another discussion.

Re:Microsoft ranked higher than Mozilla (1)

manu0601 (2221348) | about a year ago | (#42734453)

Whether that faith is warranted or not is subject for another discussion.

I understand: trust is a faith-related notion, not a rationale one.

Re:Microsoft ranked higher than Mozilla (0)

19thNervousBreakdown (768619) | about a year ago | (#42734893)

Mozilla sells your privacy. You are their product, the browser's their bait. Microsoft sells a product. And your privacy. But they make most of their money off other stuff, selling your privacy is just their change jar.

It's all about motive. Now, some might wonder if someone who doesn't survive off selling your privacy will take better or worse care of it than someone who will die if anything happens to their access to your personal data, but I doubt very many think like that.

Well (2)

EngnrFrmrlyKnownAsAC (2816391) | about a year ago | (#42731985)

Most trusted != Most trustworthy

Just sayin....

Re:Well (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42732135)

Most trusted != Most trustworthy

Just sayin....

You mean like Google?

Mozilla is Google's whore (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42736441)

Most trusted != Most trustworthy

Just sayin....

You mean like Google?

The two are sleeping with one another [wikipedia.org]. For years, Firefox' purpose has been to woo users to Google while keeping their browser defaults as privacy-unfriendly as they can get away with.

Only because of bandwagons. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42732157)

Its cool to outright hate on MS on the internet now despite real facts. Its starting to become cool to hate on google and such. So the bottom line is they are considered the most trusted just because they get the least amount of mindless zealot fanboy hate.

I read the statement and it has nothing to do with real world usage security. Its just a "perception" and nothing more.

Ill stick with microsoft products since they work the best and provide the best security, because I know what I am doing. If you have security issues with MS products then its because you are a retard or lazy or just dont know how to use them in which case youre at a security risk no matter what product you use. If people would just exercise a little brain power and forethought they would all be fine.

Re:Only because of bandwagons. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42732661)

Haters gonna hate

Your opinion is worth less than spam comments.

Lying to yourself (2)

raymorris (2726007) | about a year ago | (#42733491)

Ill stick with microsoft products since they work the best and provide the best security, because I know what I am doing. If you have security issues with MS products then its because you are a retard or lazy or just dont know how to use them in which case youre at a security risk no matter what product you use.

You like Microsoft. Cool, that's your prerogative. Lying to yourself can cost you, though.
I've been doing security full time for sixteen years. You'll find my name on CVEs where I've found flaws to instantly take out wikipedia and other top tier sites. That pretty much puts me at opposite end from "retard" when it comes to network security. When DHS and I tell you Microsoft products are full of giant security holes, we know what we're talking about. Pretending otherwise and getting the least bit sloppy while running IE will get you owned

. Example - Java exploit in Chrome on Linux could crash a browser tab. The same exploit in IE lets me install a rootkit because IE is integrated with the system shell.

Re:Only because of bandwagons. (1)

wonkey_monkey (2592601) | about a year ago | (#42735539)

Ill stick with microsoft products since they work the best and provide the best security, because I know what I am doing.

Well that's the wrong attitude for a start. A company should provide the best security because they know what they're doing, not you.

Alternate Headline (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42732197)

No internet company makes the top 10 list of most trusted companies, and Mozilla achieved DEAD LAST in the top 20 list.

Companies that beat them include:
IBM (Evil Empire 1)
eBay (how exactly is eBay not an internet company?)
Verizon (Ever read one of their contracts?)
Disney (Evil Empire 2)
AT&T (seriously? your PROUD you got beaten by the company who's logo is the death star?)

Mozilla should be downright EMBARRASSED by this list.

Not really your concern... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42732317)

'It means we as an industry all have a lot more work to do"

Does a window maker think he has work to do when the view outside of the windows he's installed into a house are bad?

What did they expect? (3, Insightful)

steelfood (895457) | about a year ago | (#42732371)

Social media, by definition, is an invasion of privacy. Except it's usually not some faceless corporation invading your privacy, but yourself, and the people with whom you socialize.

You can't socialize without giving up some privacy, plain and simple. And you're not going to be able to do socialize online, where all data is stored digitally and can be copied on a whim, without exposing your socializing to the entire world. Whether the rest of the world cares is another matter altogether.

Re:What did they expect? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42735369)

this wasn't about privacy, it specifically said trusted. it's not that people mind sharing info with fb or google, it's that you can't really trust them to know what they are doing with your info. tremendous difference.

Re:What did they expect? (1)

cerberusss (660701) | about a year ago | (#42736095)

Social media, by definition, is an invasion of privacy.

True. We are socializing here on Slashdot.

Slashdot is owned by Dice.

Re:What did they expect? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42736377)

And people ask me why I always post anonymous.

What I do online is no one's business but my own.

Re:What did they expect? (1)

0racle (667029) | about a year ago | (#42737831)

You can't socialize without giving up some privacy, plain and simple.

How do you figure?

Re:What did they expect? (1)

Sockatume (732728) | about a year ago | (#42738199)

The difference is choice. If I invite you into my home, that's OK. If you invade my home uninvited, that's not. Likewise the voluntary relinquishing of privacy inherent in all social interaction is distinct from the involuntary invasion of privacy which people - yes, even those who use the internet to communicate - are opposed to.

Re:What did they expect? (1)

syockit (1480393) | about a year ago | (#42750299)

I take it that the only home you own on the net is your own computing device. Elsewhere, you're just squatting.

AllThingsD (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42732641)

I like the big notice about tracking cookies at the top every time I visit their site. It actually explains what tracking cookies are and how you might avoid getting them.

bullshit (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42732837)

firefox's default search engine choice is proof enough.

cu_m (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42733057)

OS don't fear the future. The hand everything else sure that I've ssufering *BSD code sharing One Here but now AMERICA) is the 1. Therefore it's

No Brainer? (1)

DavidD_CA (750156) | about a year ago | (#42733259)

What would a company like Mozilla have to do to offend our privacy concerns anyway?

Companies like Microsoft, Google, Facebook, and Yahoo have all kinds of information on us. It's part of their business model to walk that fuzzy line between privacy and profit.

But Mozilla, with a browser and a few other auxiliary apps, plus a website that very few people even use beyond downloading apps, just doesn't have the capacity to piss people off like the other companies do.

I might as well say that New Egg has an excellent privacy record when compared to Microsoft and Google. Or The Onion. Or the florist down the street.

Re:No Brainer? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42733421)

What would a company like Mozilla have to do to offend our privacy concerns anyway?

Companies like Microsoft, Google, Facebook, and Yahoo have all kinds of information on us. It's part of their business model to walk that fuzzy line between privacy and profit.

But Mozilla, with a browser and a few other auxiliary apps, plus a website that very few people even use beyond downloading apps, just doesn't have the capacity to piss people off like the other companies do.

They write a browser. They could use it to watch user's behaviors and do creepy things. I think you mean they do not have a motive to violate anyone's privacy. Which is true, to a point. They get most of their money from google.

Re:No Brainer? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42734421)

They ignored the extension take down requests from Americas corporate imbeciles who seek to make your privacy their bitch.

For that alone they deserve infinite praise.

Re:No Brainer? (1)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | about a year ago | (#42734473)

They could write contracts with Microsoft, Facebook, Google and more, in which they assist in tracking users, for a fee. It seems pretty obvious that hasn't happened yet. I don't see it happening in the near to medium future, either. The distant future? Hell, anything can happen twenty years down the road.

This Story Stinks Of PR BS (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42734863)

What Mozilla is known for right now is every single machine I own all popping up the obnoxious cartoon raccoon insisting that I update plugins even though I had specifically disabled plugin updating in every install. Bringing up about:config and disabling it there wasn't enough to make it stop. Mozilla ignored what I wanted it to do and connected to the mothership to download lists of plugin versions anyway. Finally I found a workaround which didn't require adding mozilla's IP space to my firewalls or uninstalling mozilla (which I had done on several machines), which was to bump the installed plugin versions to 99 in the about:config list.

Countless people have been burned by this mozilla crap and have been uninstalling in droves, and I'll bet anything that that's why this bit of astroturf has appeared here on slashdot.

Re:This Story Stinks Of PR BS (1)

Sockatume (732728) | about a year ago | (#42738391)

I don't think you know what astroturfing is.

I'm also bemused at why you continue to use a piece of software that drives you to such rage. It is not as though there is a shortage of browsers.

There is no such thing as privacy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42735133)

Thete is the right to be secure in one's papers and effects,, but the Constitution doesn't even mention the word "privacy". Now go home and put on your tinfoil hats.

Hu?!? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42735307)

Firefox, by default, asks Google if the site you intend to visit is secure (Edition->Preference->Security->Block sites that...).

Is that privacy respect?

Microsoft beat them (1)

viperidaenz (2515578) | about a year ago | (#42741143)

It's just Microsoft didn't fit in the "Internet & Social Media industry" sub-category. Mozilla is 20th in the top 20 overall. So Internet Explorer beats Firefox.

Hell, Amazon is number 3. How do you think they make money? Selling you targeted stuff.
When you buy XYZ from some company via Amazon, do you think they don't get told that it was because the customer clicked on a "we think you'll also like..."?

Google's location-aware browsing in Firefox (1)

cpm99352 (939350) | about a year ago | (#42747333)

Maybe I'm behind the times, but I was unimpressed to learn about Mozilla Firefox handing off geographic tracking to Google. Uninstall instructions here [leavegooglebehind.com].

about:config
In the Filter box, type geo.enabled
Double click on the geo.enabled preference
Location-Aware Browsing is now disabled.
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...