"Inconvenient" or become the culprit of the leak of Internet privacy security?

One convenient, one safe, for you, which do you want? The question seems easy to answer, but when we meet as a user, the instinctive reaction of human beings may surprise us. On October 8, the Washington Post said that despite the media's repeated emphasis on the importance of Internet data security, in the face of practical applications, most users prefer to opt out of privacy security for ease of use.

It is understood that the United States well-known social sharing website Gigya recently conducted a user survey. In the survey, the testers surveyed the social habits of more than 4,000 sampled Internet users in the United States and Britain, and found that most users may have a bit of privacy concerns about personal data in the face of websites that can use Facebook or Twitter. But often they still choose to log on to their existing social-networking sites for the simple reason that they don't bother.

While Facebook, Twitter or Google are claiming every day to try to protect users ' privacy, 60% of respondents say they don't trust them. At the same time, more than 46% of users believe that websites that allow the use of existing accounts are likely to sell their personal information, and 42% of users believe that, despite their never giving authorization, the variety of ads that still swagger around their social apps or websites is the product of such deals. As for the Junk mail, 40% of respondents said their social circle had been plagued by it.

The funny thing is, though "Don't Believe", "suspicious", "uneasy", users will still log in and use these common social media and report their details one by one.

Is it ironic that the most concerned about the safety of the data is the "culprit" who leaked their privacy data? But just as the small weave has "logged in with an existing account", believe that all users of the Internet have had this experience-though few really believe that social networking sites claim to "Protect your privacy", they are willing to use and expose their personal information to each other without scruple, And that's probably just to save the hassle of a new registration.

The Washington Post argues that while it is wrong for users to overlook security at the whim of a convenience, social media is the most reprehensible object of the deal-they do not have the "first stop" obligation to do so. In other words, even if third-party platforms will require authorization to access personal data, Facebook and Twitter social media should tell users about potential data vulnerabilities in a more concise way.

Gigya Web site CEO Patrick salyer that users are not indifferent to their privacy, but to face the proving, around the provisions, they are "willing to risk."

"Third-party certification, which is responsive to the inevitable trend of simplicity and convenience for users," Patrick Salyer also points out that it is necessary to inform users in a shorter, clearer and more popular sense that the actions they take will cause those consequences.

In fact, this is a great business opportunity for the enterprise that provides the login service-only a clear understanding of the user's usage habits, and a concise emphasis on security to be effective. In this respect, Salyer said, compared to Facebook and Google, such as social networks, users more believe in PayPal or Amazon such social networking sites.

With the introduction of mobile payment in Apple, the simple introduction of mobile payment to users, it seems to be a difficult task to complete, and the same as believe that the use of the Apple ID login site as far as the trust of all sites?

"We've been talking about control, security, and a lot of misunderstanding and communication barriers to the data around us, people don't care about privacy, they need a simpler and clearer way to protect privacy."

(Responsible editor: Lvguang)