New Study Shows Over 16 Billion Accounts Have Been Breached Around the World

The breaching of accounts is a thorny issue for internet service providers because of the fact that this is the sort of thing that could potentially end up leading to security getting compromised. A study conducted by Surfshark recently shed some light on the number of accounts that have been breached so far. Based on the findings in this study, well over 16 billion accounts have been breached around the world since 2004.

With all of that having been said and now out of the way, it is important to note that people often use the same email address for multiple services. This allows malicious actors to gain widespread access to numerous accounts after breaching just a single email address, which has certainly increased the numbers in this regard.

In terms of total account breaches, the US came out on top with an estimated 2.7 billion American accounts having been compromised so far. In spite of the fact that this is the case, the US did not see the highest number of accounts being breached per capita. That dubious honor belongs to Russia, where just under 2.3 billion accounts have been breached.

For the US, around 833 accounts were breached per 100 people. That means that the average internet user there has seen 8 breaches apiece so far, but in Russia things are nearly twice as bad. For every 100 Russians, there have been a whopping 1,573 breaches with all things having been considered and taken into account.

Over in China, the numbers show just 71 breaches per 100 individuals. However, China has still seen the third highest number of breached accounts, with a grand total of just over a billion. France came in fourth with 512 million breached accounts, or 785 per 100 people, followed by Germany with 476 million.

One area where China is actually performing spectacularly is in terms of decreasing the quantity of account breaches. The East Asian nation has managed to see a 97% decline in account breaches, although the country that performed best by this metric was South Sudan where a 99% decrease was seen quarter over quarter.

On the other end of the spectrum, Taiwan was the worst performer by a large margin. The East Asian nation saw account breaches increase by a massive 1,986% within the span of a single quarter, coming up to 3.8 million accounts.

Over in South Korea, a 1,138% uptick was seen. That means that just under 1.2 million accounts were compromised in a three month timeframe. South Africa also performed poorly, with a 954% increase bringing bringing its total to a little over 420,000.

Read next: 49% of Survey Respondents Are Worried About AI Security Risks
by Zia Muhammad via Digital Information World

Repetitive Ads Can Ruin a Brand’s Reputation, Here’s Why

Brands have a tendency to streamline various processes, but in spite of the fact that this is the case, sometimes this can do more harm than good. A recent study conducted by IPG and Nexxen revealed that repetitive ads, which are often used to cut down on costs, can make a consumer’s purchasing intent lower than might have been the case otherwise. This is mostly due to the damage that it can do a brand’s reputation.

According to the survey that was conducted as part of this report, 48% of people find repetitive ads to be annoying. 33% went so far as to say that they were a serious disruption that ruin the immersion that they are looking for in terms of their viewing experience. While it could be said that brands are not aware of how repetitive their ads are becoming, 83% of the people that responded to this survey were of the opinion that this was an intentional move on their part.

With all of that having been said and now out of the way, it is important to note that 68% placed the blame for this repetition squarely on brands themselves, although 44% said that streaming services also shared at least some of the blame.

The study also revealed that seeing an ad six times or more led to 92% brand recall, which might be useful because of the fact that this is the sort of thing that could potentially end up keeping the brand in the customer’s mind. However, it can also have a damaging effect, since most of these customers would form a very negative opinion of the brand. Given the high level of recall, this negative perception will not end up going away anytime soon.

All in all, the brand recall came at the expensive of purchasing intent with all things having been considered and taken into account. The study noted a 16% decline in purchasing intent for those customers who were forced to see an ad half a dozen times, so the cons definitely outweigh the pros in this regard.

It can also be detrimental for streaming services, since customers are not likely to want to stick around if they are shown the same ad repeatedly. There is a chance that these consumers would get fed up of the streaming service, thereby leading to them turning to other platforms in order to satisfy their content consumption needs.

This highlights just how necessary it can be for both brands as well as streaming service providers to partner with companies that can diversify the ads that customers will see. Six exposures do have the undeniable advantage of boosting recall, but if these occurrences happen too closely to one another, the decline in purchasing intent can become an unavoidable eventuality.

It will be interesting to see how this study impacts the performance of ads across the world. The enormous saturation of the digital ad landscape is posing numerous problems, and with third party tracking and personal data getting ever harder to come by, digital ads need to change for the better. Steps must be taken to ensure that the proper cadence is attained when it comes to ads being shown.

Read next: Mobile App Economy Surges: Global In-App Expenditure Skyrockets to Record $67.5 Billion In H1 2023
by Zia Muhammad via Digital Information World

86% of Consumers Are Willing to Share Their Email Address, Here’s Why That Matters

Most brands nowadays are facing a similar problem in that they are struggling to ascertain what information consumers will be comfortable enough sharing with them. The App Tracking Transparency protocol implemented by Apple, coupled with the deprecation of third party cookies by Google and other tech companies, has made it ever more difficult for marketers and brands to get their hands on this all important data.

With all of that having been said and now out of the way, it is important to note that there is one type of information that customers are willing to share. This comes from a survey conduced by Airship, and it revealed that as many as 86% of customers said that they would not mind sharing their email address with brands. That can be important because of the fact that this is the sort of thing that could potentially end up allowing brands to communicate offers and promotions more effectively than might have been the case otherwise.

Interestingly, 78% of customers stated that they are willing to provide data pertaining to their interests as well with all things having been considered and taken into account. 77% will provide their name, 70% said that they can offer their preferred mode of communication, and two out of three consumers, or 66% to be precise, mentioned that they will allow brands to see what they perused on their website.

These are the top five bits of info that brands can obtain from customers. In spite of the fact that this is the case, other pieces of data are far less accessible, such as location tracking. Just 43% of customers feel comfortable with brands being able to track their precise location, so this might not be the most ideal area for brands to explore. Social media profiles are also closely guarded, with the majority of customers, 56%, saying that they would never allow brands to get their hands on anything of this sort.

All in all, brands must be aware of what they can and can’t ask for. This will help forge stronger relationships with customers.

Read next: Mobile App Economy Surges: Global In-App Expenditure Skyrockets to Record $67.5 Billion In H1 2023
by Zia Muhammad via Digital Information World

79% of Corporate Strategists Say AI is Essential

As of right now, an estimated 15% of activities related to strategic planning and the execution of these plans involves any heavy amount of automation with all things having been considered and taken into account. In spite of the fact that this is the case, 79% of strategists working in the corporate sphere are of the opinion that automation and AI will become absolutely critical over the next couple of years.

This information comes from a recent Gartner survey which polled 200 advisors and strategists working in the field. With all of that having been said and now out of the way, it is important to note that around 50% of all activities can be automated if there is enough of a desire to do so. This will triple the amount of automation that is currently being seen, so the optimism of corporate strategists does seem to hold some weight.

As practically every single sector continues to grow, there will be more data to collect and analyze. AI will be able to get this done faster than might have been the case otherwise, and it might force corporations that were hesitant to hop on the AI bandwagon to give it a change.

72% of the people that responded to this survey stated that they are using descriptive analytics, with 62% saying the same for diagnostics. However, predictive analytics are only being used by 42% of respondents, and just 26% stated that they are using prescriptive analytics as well.

This seems to suggest that the more experimental uses for AI are having a tough time getting a wider range of acceptance in the corporate strategist community. Machine learning and natural language processors are also seeing a similar rarity in terms of acceptance, being used by just 20% and 23% respectively.

The shift to AI is clearly under way, but it may take some time for the full effects to come to light. Until then, it will be interesting to see how many strategists and the corporations that they work for are willing to experiment with this brand new form of tech that can transform so many processes.

Read next: The Energy Crunch: AI Data Centers and the Battle for Power
by Zia Muhammad via Digital Information World

From LinkedIn, YouTube to TikTok and Threads, Which App Reached 100 Million Users the Fastest?

After Elon Musk took control of Twitter and began its downward trajectory, rumors began to circulate of Meta creating its own Twitter clone. The tech juggernaut is known for being an app killer, often genericizing features such as what it did with Snapchat Stories by incorporating it into each and every service that fell under its umbrella. Threads is the latest addition to Meta’s social media catalogue, and it’s safe to say that its launch has been a resounding success.

Within the span of just 5 days, Threads was able to reach the 100 million user mark. This was helped in no small part by the billions of users Meta as across its other platforms, namely Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp. Funnelling all of these users into the Twitter clone allowed Meta to break the record easily, thereby making ChatGPT’s once impressive feat seem like a flash in the pan.

With all of that having been said and now out of the way, it is important to note that OpenAI’s powerful chatbot was the previous holder of the top spot in terms of how quickly an app can cross the 100 million user threshold. It took ChatGPT 2 months to reach 100 million users, and now that it has been surpassed by Threads, it will be interesting to see if any other app is able to accomplish this feat so quickly.

Meta has a long history of breaking these types of records. Instagram, WhatsApp and Facebook have all held this record at some point or another, with Facebook first reaching this total in 2004. It took a whopping 4 years and 6 months to reach 100 million users, with WhatsApp taking 3 years and 6 months in 2009, and Instagram taking 2 years and 6 months in 2010.

In spite of the fact that this is the case, these apps now occupy the 10th, 7th and 5th places respectively. Before ChatGPT’s soaring rise to the top, TikTok had managed the feat in 9 months in 2017, which signalled the end of Meta and Google’s rise to dominance. TikTok now sits in 3rd place behind Threads and ChatGPT.

Google has also seen its fair share of success, with YouTube toppling Meta to reach a hundred million users in 2005 after 4 years and 1 month. This was 5 months faster than Facebook managed it which puts YouTube in 9th place, although Snapchat took the crown in 2011 after its 3 years and 8 months race to the top which gives it the 8th ranking.

One thing that bears mentioning is that all of these apps were second to MySpace, which 3 years to reach a hundred million in 2003. Instagram was the first app to outrank it in 2010.

H/T: VC

Read next: Good News For Brands As Data Proves They’re Getting Great Engagement On The Threads App
by Zia Muhammad via Digital Information World

To Join Threads, Anticipate These Potential Risks on Your User Data

Meta recently launched a new text-based app that is intrinsically connected to Instagram. Meta is a social media platform in competition with Twitter. Threads already have over 100 million registered users. Users are unaware of sharing their data by third parties, which Meta claims is not under their control.

Threads have enabled third-party services to access user online habits and location as aspects of data collection, over which Meta has no control, unlike its other applications such as Instagram, Facebook, and others. Users are clueless about how their data exploitation and where it ends up.

It gets more unnerving. The general privacy policy is applicable across Meta Products, mentioning an array of what is collected. These include accessing cameras, unencrypted messages, user interaction with website ads and content, and their screen time on apps. As though that does not infringe on user privacy enough, they have access to device details, including the users' device battery percentage and signal strength.

However, like other products by different companies, Meta accesses proximate locations by collecting their users' IP addresses regardless of location service status. But Threads also has access to personal demographics — race, ethnicity, pregnancy state, education status, health information, and loosely defined sensitive or classified data, and according to the policies constructed by Apple, those are religious or philosophical beliefs. Meta also collects credit card numbers and transaction details for online purchases, along with shipping, billing, contract details, and the product the user purchases.

This is highly concerning, as confirmed in a CBS report by a cybersecurity expert from Drexel University, who claimed that the guidelines did not protect users' data. Such breach of personal privacy data can be as invasive as the events of a Nebraska woman charged with aiding her daughter to receive an abortion upon evidence shared by Meta.

And this extent of data collection is just the tip of the iceberg. Users can only delete their Threads account by deleting their Instagram profile. But what is essential to consider is Threads’ supplemental privacy policy which further collects profile information, users’ interaction with the app and the content they upload, and their engagement with other communities and people. The third parties control this integration, which is beyond Meta’s control. This means they can send off personal user data to various companies and investors, all unbeknownst to the user.

Although users can delete their information within Instagram settings and control their privacy settings, that does not guarantee their safety from private data scraping. Meta further claimed to Insider that their privacy policies are similar across all their apps. They only collect data shared with them according to the types mentioned in the App Store, and users can share various types of data. They also suggested reviewing Threads' supplementary privacy policy on data collection.

Read next: A decade of record-breaking emoji popularity throughout the course of 10 years
by Ahmed Naeem via Digital Information World

Google Claims SEO Has Stayed the Same for 20 Years

Individuals working in the field of search engine optimization are often sitting around and waiting for the next big change to drop. Doing so can be crucial because of the fact that this is the sort of thing that could potentially end up allowing them to adjust their methodologies accordingly. However, Google’s liaison of search, Danny Sullivan, has claimed that the manner by which you can climb the rankings on Google’s SERP has not changed all that dramatically in the past two years.

With all of that having been said and now out of the way, it is important to note that there is at least some veracity to his statement. If you were to take a look at Google’s guidelines back in 2002, you might notice a section that tells people to create content for users instead of the algorithm. Even now, this can help you rank higher than might have been the case otherwise, so it might be a useful thing to keep in mind.

"Make pages for users, not for search engines." -- Google, 2002

Our good advice then remains the same over two decades later. To succeed in Google Search, focus on people-first content.https://t.co/NaRQqb1SQx pic.twitter.com/bibv53icz9

— Google SearchLiaison (@searchliaison) July 6, 2023

Many website owners try to manipulate the algorithm, but in spite of the fact that this is the case, creating content precisely for the search engine is never going to help you get a high enough ranking with all things having been considered and taken into account. People first approaches are the name of the game, and it has clearly been that way for at least two decades if not longer.

It will be interesting to see how this affects people’s approaches to SEO in the near future. Some are saying that this is the harbinger of a major change that is to come, although Danny Sullivan himself has claimed that this is just a useful piece of information to provide. SEO professionals who try to game the system are always going to end up with subpar results, since their webpages simply won’t contain the type of authoritative information that Google is trying to provide to people.

The core advice has stayed the same, and it is not likely going to change anytime soon. Only a major seismic shift can change such a foundational element to SEO.

Read next: Google Silently Takes A Step Back From Creating A New AI-Based Mobile Chatbot App
by Zia Muhammad via Digital Information World