THINK TWICE BEFORE YOU CLICK ON THAT!

Members of Facebook, Twitter, or any other social networking site, you have been warned; you could be the next targeted victim.  There is a goldmine of personal information on social networking sites and cyber-thieves are cashing in on it.  Don’t let them get your information – think twice before you click on that!

All you have do is click it, and you’ll open up that hilarious video of Aunt Bunny falling down the stairs at the family cook-out, it’s just a harmless funny video that your best Facebook buddy wanted you to see;  However when that message or link is opened, the user is lured to fake Web sites that trick them into divulging personal details and passwords.  The phishing attack can penetrate the users’ accounts without their knowledge or consent.  And once that happens, the thieves can continue to penetrate the users’ list of friends or contacts and repeat the attack on consequent victims.

Although you may only hear of a small percentage, malicious thieves are constantly attacking social networking sites.  The continued growth of users on the social networks has made the networks extremely profitable for cyber-criminals and with Facebook users boasting of 150 friends or more; it’s like a smorgasbord of potential victims for the cyber-thieves.

Internet crimes have been around since the inception of the World Wide Web, and malicious software and viruses were usually the result of a prank.  But now, the most common form of malware attack has become known as drive-by downloads. While surfing on Google or Yahoo, a computer virus or spyware is automatically and invisibly downloaded on a computer, requiring no interaction from the user for the computer to be infected.

Not since the abundance of social networking sites and their members has internet crime been so prevalent.  Facebook alone boast that it has a whopping 300 million users, and Twitter, a micro-social-blogging site, has grown to more than 7 million users.

Be mindful of the enticements rampant on such sites as Facebook; you know the ones, claiming that one of your friends has the highest IQ score of the day of 140; he/she wants you to try to beat it.  When they’ve never even seen the quiz let along taken it and challenged you.  Also are those never ending applications that “need to access your account information” in order for you to continue or use it.  And we all know too well from the countless media reports that putting personal photos on any public domain is risky – that innocent pic of you on the sofa is easily Photoshop to show you nude in a compromising situation – for resale on a porn site.

There are a number of reasons Cybercriminals are using phishing attacks, including trying to obtain private information, such as bank account numbers and passwords to perform even greater scams. They also try to redirect users to sites where profit is feed by the number of visitors.  There was even a phishing attack involving one of the popular social sites in which a duplicate of their widely recognized light blue page was used in a hoax. To avoid situations such as this, users should always double-check the URL to ensure they are visiting the correct site.

Social networks are aggressively fighting back against the attacks from cybercriminals. Most sites have information pages dedicated to educating users about the risks of Internet scams. One of the most common pieces of advice given by security experts is to change passwords frequently.  Facebook has also developed complex automated systems that detect compromised accounts. They spot and freeze accounts that are sending an unusually high number of messages to their friends; and will even go as far as to delete the account.  Ultimately users must be responsible and utilize care while on the Internet, especially when exchanging personal information.  I’m not telling you to delete your social network accounts, just suggesting you use caution while socializing.  If you didn’t request it, or recognize it, think twice before you click on it!

Helpful hints (Provided by FBI and Internet security experts) to protect you against internet scams:

• Be careful what you click on
• Change your passwords frequently
• Adjust Web site privacy settings
• Be selective when adding friends
• Limit access to your profile to contacts you trust
• Disable options such as photo sharing
• Learn how &  report a compromised account
• Use security software that updates automatically

If you should ever find yourself the unfortunate victim of Internet Fraud/Theft, here are some links that may be helpful.

• Internet Crime Complaint Center: http://www.ic3.gov/default.aspx
• FBI-Internet Crime: http://www.fbi.gov/majcases/fraud/internetschemes.htm
• Bankersonline Identity theft: http://www.bankersonline.com/security/aandc.html
• ID Fraud Phishing: http://www.bankersonline.com/idtheft/idtheft.html

BEING RICH/WEATLHY DOES NOT GRANT YOU ABSOLUTION NOR DOES IT NEGATE YOU FROM RESPONSIBILITY

View Full Album

There are far too many hunger, homeless, and unemployment people in America. So when I read articles as those written on: Cage, Rajaratnam, and Lohan; I must admit that to some degree it unnerves me a bit, to think that for some insane reason these individuals somehow think (or behave in a matter) that being rich grants them absolution or negates them from being responsible for their actions, deeds, or affairs. And by no means do I think all rich or wealthy people behave or think along these lines. But there are a number of them that seem to think it’s their God-given right to do so.

First, although I was once a loyal fan of Nicolas Cage I find it

disturbing that someone of his supposedly intelligence could whine publicly about not being smart enough to keep an eye on his own assets. I also find it difficult to support the “I’m broke” pity-party of someone pulling down 38 million dollars on one movie. Geez! He could feed a small country on that salary.

Among other things one of the statements in the article that really stands out for me is,

“The lawsuit said the advisor had also failed to alert Cage to the fact that his money was running out, and had over-extended his lines of credit with banks.”

Again, I must point out to those like Cage who don’t seem to know it, but being rich does not negate you from being responsible for your own finances. If you think you are too important, busy, or wealthy to keep an eye on your own money, than clearly you don’t really deserve to complain when it’s gone. How is it that there are some so-called stars who can’t seem to be able to handle their own lives without an entourage of assistants, advisors, housekeepers, and what-nots? When there are so many others who don’t seem to have an issue with handling their own affairs, or keeping an eye on those they’ve hired to do it for them. Take a page from the book(s) of Oprah, who has stated on numerous occasions, “You must keep an eye on your own money.” Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, and others also follow this philosophy; I’m almost certain the aforementioned are much busier than Nick Cage.

“Cage claimed that his recently-fired business manager had failed to pay taxes when they were due and had placed him in speculative and risky real estate investments "resulting in (the actor) suffering catastrophic losses."

Are Cage and others like him so special they aren’t required to sign a tax return? If not, then it should have occurred to Cage that if he hadn’t signed a return, one had not been filed. I realize for some it is easier to blame others for any and everything that may have gone wrong within your life; but how do you justify blaming or suing someone else for your neglect and foolishness – the police will tell you, that “ignorance is no excuse” for not obeying a law. Granted if someone within your trusted entourage of advisors steals from you, they should be sued and made to repay, but if its bad advice and you accept it, then that’s on you.

As much confidence as I have in my extremely knowledgeable financial advisor, J. Williams; if he were to suggest that I invest in the failed Circuit City stores, I’d be a fool to do so.

In August 2007, Lindsay Lohan was ordered to complete an 18-month alcohol education program, serve 24 hours in jail and perform 10 days of community service while on 36 months probation for drunk driving, reckless driving and driving under the influence of cocaine. You know the story.

However, because of Lohan’s lack of responsibility, Judge Revel added one year to Lohan's sentence so she could finish the program and suggested the actress complete it as soon as possible. The 23-year-old actress's attorney, Shawn Chapman Holley, told the judge that Lohan's absences stemmed from a miscommunication between her and program administrators. Again, although she’s rich and has the funds to hire an expensive attorney, stylish, etc. she still has to be held responsible and accountable for her own affairs and actions.

Finally, we come to Rajaratnam 52, considered the richest Sri Lankan in the world, was arrested for conspiring with Intel Capital treasury department managing director Rajiv Goel and Anil Kumar, a director of McKinsey & Co. The alleged offenses took place over three years

starting in January 2006. The scheme made more than $20 million in illegal profits over several years.

Rajaratnam was released on a $100 million personal recognizance bond secured by $20 million in cash and property. Clearly he’s not hurting for money, but for some bizarre reason he seems to think he’s above following the rules regarding “insider trading” because foolishness and greed will make you ignore the rules as well as the obvious.

All six were charged with securities fraud and conspiracy in two criminal complaints filed in U.S. District Court in Manhattan. Kumar was permitted to be released on a $5 million bond, Kurland on a $3 million bond, and Moffat and Chiesi on a $2 million bond. In California, Goel posted $300,000 cash for bail. The six were also charged in a separate civil complaint by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The SEC said the accused traded on insider information from 10 companies.

Interesting to note, was the prosecutor’s warning shot for the rest of Wall Street, "Today, tomorrow, next week, the week after, privileged Wall Street insiders who are considering breaking the law will have to ask themselves one important question: Is law enforcement listening?" he said. But how effective it will be for the other privileged-law-breakers, is yet to be seen.

In conclusion, a child is a responsibility to its parents. As is being responsible is a requirement of an adult. Responsibility, as defined is an instance of being responsible (accountable): as such, there has to be some degree of accountability for one’s own affairs. Therefore, Cage, Lohan, and Rajaratnam the responsibility for this mess is ultimately yours!

Chrystal Tags: celebrity, celebrities, Lindsay Lohan, Nicolas Cage, money, law, lawsuit, finances, criminals, millions, responsibility, absolution

BEING RICH/WEATLHY DOES NOT GRANT YOU ABSOLUTION NOR DOES IT NEGATE YOU FROM RESPONSIBILITY

There are far too many hunger, homeless, and unemployment people in America. So when I read articles as those written on: Cage, Rajaratnam, and Lohan; I must admit that to some degree it unnerves me a bit, to think that for some insane reason these individuals somehow think (or behave in a matter) that being rich grants them absolution or negates them from being responsible for their actions, deeds, or affairs. And by no means do I think all rich or wealthy people behave or think along these lines. But there are a number of them that seem to think it’s their God-given right to do so.

First, although I was once a loyal fan of Nicolas Cage I find it

disturbing that someone of his supposedly intelligence could whine publicly about not being smart enough to keep an eye on his own assets. I also find it difficult to support the “I’m broke” pity-party of someone pulling down 38 million dollars on one movie. Geez! He could feed a small country on that salary.

Among other things one of the statements in the article that really stands out for me is,

“The lawsuit said the advisor had also failed to alert Cage to the fact that his money was running out, and had over-extended his lines of credit with banks.”

Again, I must point out to those like Cage who don’t seem to know it, but being rich does not negate you from being responsible for your own finances. If you think you are too important, busy, or wealthy to keep an eye on your own money, than clearly you don’t really deserve to complain when it’s gone. How is it that there are some so-called stars who can’t seem to be able to handle their own lives without an entourage of assistants, advisors, housekeepers, and what-nots? When there are so many others who don’t seem to have an issue with handling their own affairs, or keeping an eye on those they’ve hired to do it for them. Take a page from the book(s) of Oprah, who has stated on numerous occasions, “You must keep an eye on your own money.” Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, and others also follow this philosophy; I’m almost certain the aforementioned are much busier than Nick Cage.

“Cage claimed that his recently-fired business manager had failed to pay taxes when they were due and had placed him in speculative and risky real estate investments "resulting in (the actor) suffering catastrophic losses."

Are Cage and others like him so special they aren’t required to sign a tax return? If not, then it should have occurred to Cage that if he hadn’t signed a return, one had not been filed. I realize for some it is easier to blame others for any and everything that may have gone wrong within your life; but how do you justify blaming or suing someone else for your neglect and foolishness – the police will tell you, that “ignorance is no excuse” for not obeying a law. Granted if someone within your trusted entourage of advisors steals from you, they should be sued and made to repay, but if its bad advice and you accept it, then that’s on you.

As much confidence as I have in my extremely knowledgeable financial advisor, J. Williams; if he were to suggest that I invest in the failed Circuit City stores, I’d be a fool to do so.

In August 2007, Lindsay Lohan was ordered to complete an 18-month alcohol education program, serve 24 hours in jail and perform 10 days of community service while on 36 months probation for drunk driving, reckless driving and driving under the influence of cocaine. You know the story.

However, because of Lohan’s lack of responsibility, Judge Revel added one year to Lohan's sentence so she could finish the program and suggested the actress complete it as soon as possible. The 23-year-old actress's attorney, Shawn Chapman Holley, told the judge that Lohan's absences stemmed from a miscommunication between her and program administrators. Again, although she’s rich and has the funds to hire an expensive attorney, stylish, etc. she still has to be held responsible and accountable for her own affairs and actions.

Finally, we come to Rajaratnam 52, considered the richest Sri Lankan in the world, was arrested for conspiring with Intel Capital treasury department managing director Rajiv Goel and Anil Kumar, a director of McKinsey & Co. The alleged offenses took place over three years

starting in January 2006. The scheme made more than $20 million in illegal profits over several years.

Rajaratnam was released on a $100 million personal recognizance bond secured by $20 million in cash and property. Clearly he’s not hurting for money, but for some bizarre reason he seems to think he’s above following the rules regarding “insider trading” because foolishness and greed will make you ignore the rules as well as the obvious.

All six were charged with securities fraud and conspiracy in two criminal complaints filed in U.S. District Court in Manhattan. Kumar was permitted to be released on a $5 million bond, Kurland on a $3 million bond, and Moffat and Chiesi on a $2 million bond. In California, Goel posted $300,000 cash for bail. The six were also charged in a separate civil complaint by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The SEC said the accused traded on insider information from 10 companies.

Interesting to note, was the prosecutor’s warning shot for the rest of Wall Street, "Today, tomorrow, next week, the week after, privileged Wall Street insiders who are considering breaking the law will have to ask themselves one important question: Is law enforcement listening?" he said. But how effective it will be for the other privileged-law-breakers, is yet to be seen.

In conclusion, a child is a responsibility to its parents. As is being responsible is a requirement of an adult. Responsibility, as defined is an instance of being responsible (accountable): as such, there has to be some degree of accountability for one’s own affairs. Therefore, Cage, Lohan, and Rajaratnam the responsibility for this mess is ultimately yours!

Chrystal Tags: celebrity, celebrities, Lindsay Lohan, Nicolas Cage, money, law, lawsuit, finances, criminals, millions, responsibility, absolution

A Writer's Life: TV Main Title of the Week

A Writer's Life: TV Main Title of the Week

The Indictment of America

The Indictment of America

Posted using ShareThis

DISCOVERING YOURSELF IN EYEGLASSES « Online With Chrystal

DISCOVERING YOURSELF IN EYEGLASSES « Online With Chrystal

Posted using ShareThis

And Away We Go

I'm not certain why, but I've created another blog. Its not as if I have nothing better to do but blog, then again, what's better than blogging - today, nothing. Anyway, I thought the blog's title was much too good to pass up. So here I have yet another blog site for me to maintain and post something interesting that someone other than myself would actually like to read. The up side to this blog is that I can write about anything here and it will be considered ultimate, why because the blog title states that it is. I look forward to posting some content worthy of your time. And away we go...