Slashdot Mirror


Norton '12 Cybercrime Numbers Lower Than Last Year's — But Just As Bad

Curseyoukhan writes "Norton released its annual cybercrime report on Wednesday, and the company put the 'direct costs associated with global consumer cybercrime at US $110 billion over the past twelve months.' Last year's report put the total 'at an annual price of $388 billion globally based on financial losses and time lost.' That's more than the estimated value of the global black market in marijuana, cocaine and heroin combined ($288 billion), the report said. But Norton makes no mention of the vast difference in 2011 and 2012 numbers. That's because last year's number was entirely fictitious." Something tells me that the scare-monger number-wavers aren't as embarrassed by this sort of logical deconstruction as they should be.

6 of 46 comments (clear)

  1. Last Line by CanHasDIY · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Thankfully, Norton's security products are generally better than its reports.

    Yea, and their security products suck donkey balls, so what's that tell you about their reports?

    --
    An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
  2. Last year's figures weren't fictitious. by WebManWalking · · Score: 3, Funny

    Norton prefers to say that they were colonically extracted.

  3. Re:Norton by craigminah · · Score: 4, Informative

    While you personally don't like Norton or their products, AV Comparatives and other independent testers (e.g. CNet, PCMag, etc.) show NIS at the top in terms of detection, removal, low-system resource utilization, etc. Empirical evidence shows its very good at what it does. I've used NIS for a few years and I like the GUI, the speed, and the way it works but I didn't like the price which is why I switched to Avast but it's hard to say NIS isn't effective and efficient at what it does unless you're letting your emotions take over.

  4. Friend hacked[tm] my e-mail... by Hazel+Bergeron · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...deleted discussion of my $1 trillion idea, so I never got to put it into action.

    Norton's figures are thus way too low.

    Excluding this, though, Norton may be including the media industry association criminals who overvalue the loss of copying bits representing a Britney Spears wailing lament, or whatever the cool kids are listening to these days.

  5. if I understand this, it says: by the_fat_kid · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This years made up numbers lower than last years made up numbers.

    next years made up numbers might be even lower.

    Is that a good thing?

    --
    -- Sig under construction...
  6. Re:Vast Improvement! by postbigbang · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Well, first you have to go to the BPA to find out how much software is pirated. The answer: the GNP of Brazil.

    Next, you have to go to the RIAA to find out about music piracy. The answer is: the GNP of Brazil times a fudge factor of 1.5.

    Then, you have to go to the MPAA to get the number of how much movie theatre and rental/royalty losses that they suffer. This is the GNP of Nigeria, times a factor of 7.233.

    Finally, if you're in the systems protection business, you have to talk about the losses from break-ins, data loss, user-down time due to StuxNet (they left Iran out of the figures) which is the GNP of Greece times an amazing 294.888.

    Go on check my figures. Be scared. Be very scared.

    --
    ---- Teach Peace. It's Cheaper Than War.