cross pond high tech
86
light views on high tech in both Europe and US
Follow
Scooped by Philippe J DEWOST onto cross pond high tech
Scoop.it!

Microsoft's post-PC dilemma couldn't be clearer in Mary Meeker's latest slide show

Microsoft's post-PC dilemma couldn't be clearer in Mary Meeker's latest slide show | cross pond high tech | Scoop.it
FORTUNE -- Kleiner Perkins' Mary ("Queen of the Net") Meeker gave her annual Internet Trends presentation at Stanford University Monday night, and as always her slide deck is a trove of cleverly presented data.

The chart above builds on the work of Asymco's Horace Dediu to show the rise and fall of what for decades seemed the unassailable duopoly of computing: Microsoft (MSFT) Windows running on Intel (INTC) chips. Now it's being rapidly overtaken by mobile devices running Apple's (AAPL) iOS or Google's (GOOG) Android.
No comment yet.
Philippe J DEWOST is also curating
pixels and pictures
Discover Topics Philippe J DEWOST is following
Chemin spirituel Investir dans les Start-ups Pierre Paperon Content Curation Tools Cloudwatt Delivering Video To The Home: The New Challenges of OTT, Broadcast and IPTV
and 20 others
Your new post is loading...
Scooped by Philippe J DEWOST
Scoop.it!

Babel phish: In which languages are internet passwords easiest to crack?

Babel phish: In which languages are internet passwords easiest to crack? | cross pond high tech | Scoop.it
In which languages are internet passwords easiest to crack?

DESPITE entreaties not to, many people choose rather predictable passwords to protect themselves online. "12345"; "password"; and the like are easy to remember but also easy for attackers to guess, especially with programs that automate the process using lists ("dictionaries") of common choices. Cambridge University computer scientist Joseph Bonneau has recently published an analysis of the passwords chosen by almost 70m (anonymised) Yahoo! users. One interesting result is shown below. The chart shows what percentage of accounts could be cracked after 1,000 attempts using such a dictionary. Amateur linguists can have fun speculating on why the Chinese do so well and the Indonesians do not. But one particularly interesting twist is how little difference using language-specific dictionaries makes. It is possible to crack roughly 4% of Chinese accounts using a Chinese dictionary; using a generic dictionary containing the most common terms from many languages, that figure drops only slightly, to 2.9%. Speakers of every language, it seems, have fairly similar preferences.
No comment yet.