As businesses become increasingly cautious about deploying artificial intelligence, their employees appear to be heading in the opposite direction.

New research from UK technology services provider Acora reveals that Google searches related to hiding AI usage have surged by 489% over the past two years, raising questions about whether corporate restrictions are inadvertently encouraging employees to use AI tools without their employers’ knowledge.

The findings highlight a growing challenge for businesses attempting to balance the productivity benefits of generative AI with concerns about data privacy, security and regulatory compliance.

While corporate leadership teams debate the risks of AI adoption, employees are increasingly exploring ways to use the technology independently, potentially creating a new generation of cybersecurity vulnerabilities.

The Growing Shadow AI Problem

Acora analysed four years of UK Google search data across 50 search terms associated with potentially unauthorised AI activity.

These included queries about deleting ChatGPT conversations, bypassing workplace restrictions, concealing AI-generated content and determining whether popular AI tools are safe for confidential information.

The research identified 161,934 UK searches related to potentially unsanctioned AI use over the past year, representing a 48% increase compared with two years earlier.

That figure is also approximately 2.6 times the search volume recorded during ChatGPT’s first year.

Perhaps more revealing is the dramatic growth in searches specifically associated with concealing AI activity.

Queries about deleting or hiding AI chat histories increased from 1,861 to 10,958 over two years, a rise of 489%.

Three categories of potentially risky behaviour — concerns about data safety, efforts to conceal AI activity and attempts to bypass restrictions — collectively accounted for more than 100,000 searches over the past year.

This represents more than three times the level recorded two years earlier.

The findings suggest that interest in AI tools is continuing to accelerate even as organisations reconsider how quickly they should deploy the technology.

This growing disconnect reflects the broader challenge of shadow AI, where employees adopt artificial intelligence tools outside officially approved corporate systems.

As Tech Trends recently explored in its coverage of NordLayer AI Scout and the growing security risks of shadow AI, organisations are increasingly struggling to understand which AI applications employees are using, what information they are sharing and where sensitive corporate data might be going.

However, Acora emphasises that search volumes indicate interest and possible intent rather than confirmed workplace behaviour. The data cannot establish whether individual searches were conducted by employees or whether AI tools were subsequently used in violation of company policies.

Employees Are Looking for Ways to Cover Their Tracks

One of the most striking findings concerns the growing interest in removing evidence of AI activity.

Searches for “how to delete ChatGPT history” reached 4,052 over the past year, an increase of 418% compared with two years earlier.

These trends raise questions about whether employees are becoming increasingly concerned about how their AI usage might be monitored.

Of course, deleting chat histories is not necessarily evidence of wrongdoing. Many users routinely clear their browsing histories and conversations for legitimate privacy reasons.

Nevertheless, the growing interest in these activities presents challenges for organisations seeking visibility into how AI systems interact with corporate information.

When employees use unapproved AI services, sensitive documents, customer information or proprietary business data may be processed outside established security controls.

If those interactions are subsequently deleted or otherwise concealed, businesses may struggle to establish what information was shared and whether any data protection obligations have been compromised.

Confidential Data Concerns Are Rising Rapidly

Acora’s research also reveals growing uncertainty about whether AI platforms can safely handle confidential business information.

Searches for “is ChatGPT safe for confidential information” increased by 1,046% over two years, rising from 144 to 1,650.

Questions about Microsoft’s Copilot tools have also increased significantly.

Searches for “is Copilot safe to use at work” increased by 159% over the past year.

These figures suggest that users are increasingly aware of potential privacy and security implications but may lack clear guidance about what information can safely be shared with AI systems.

The distinction between consumer AI services and enterprise-managed deployments is particularly important.

Enterprise AI platforms may offer additional administrative controls, contractual data protections and information governance capabilities. However, those safeguards depend on the specific product, configuration and organisational policies.

Simply approving an AI tool does not automatically guarantee that employees understand how to use it securely.

The issue also reflects a wider challenge surrounding AI-enabled technologies and personal information.

For example, a recent Tech Trends investigation into the hidden privacy risks of AI-powered smart glasses highlighted how emerging AI devices can collect and process sensitive information through cloud-based services, sometimes with limited transparency about data retention and third-party access.

Although workplace AI assistants and smart glasses serve different purposes, both illustrate the importance of understanding where information is processed, who can access it and how long it remains available.

For businesses, those questions become particularly important when employees use AI tools without consulting IT or security teams.

Businesses Are Slowing Down While Employees Push Ahead

The growing interest in potentially unauthorised AI activity comes at a time when many organisations are reconsidering their AI deployment strategies.

According to research from FTI Consulting, 60% of businesses have slowed, paused or scaled back planned AI deployments because of reputational, regulatory or trust concerns.

This creates an increasingly difficult situation for IT leaders.

Organisations may be delaying AI deployments to ensure appropriate safeguards are established, while employees continue looking for tools that can help them complete everyday tasks more efficiently.

Writing reports, summarising meetings, analysing documents and preparing presentations are among the activities where generative AI can offer immediate productivity benefits.

When approved solutions are unavailable, employees may be tempted to turn to free consumer alternatives.

The resulting phenomenon, commonly known as shadow AI, presents many of the same challenges as shadow IT, but potentially with greater consequences for information security.

Unlike traditional unauthorised software, generative AI applications can receive and process substantial amounts of sensitive information through ordinary text prompts.

Employees may inadvertently expose confidential business information simply by asking an AI assistant to summarise an internal document or analyse customer data.

The challenge is therefore not limited to identifying which applications employees access. Organisations must also understand how those applications interact with corporate information.

AI Restrictions May Be Creating New Risks

Another important finding concerns attempts to bypass restrictions on AI services.

Acora’s research identified a substantial increase in searches associated with circumventing AI blocks, suggesting growing interest in accessing services that may be unavailable through conventional channels.

Although some of this activity may originate from students attempting to access AI tools on restricted educational networks, the trend raises broader questions about the effectiveness of blocking access to AI platforms.

Employees determined to use generative AI may simply move to alternative services, including platforms that require no registration.

Such services can present additional governance challenges because organisations may have limited visibility into their data retention policies, security practices or the information being processed.

AI-powered meeting assistants represent another potential area of concern.

If employees use unapproved meeting assistants to record confidential conversations, businesses could inadvertently expose sensitive information to third-party services.

This becomes particularly problematic when discussions involve customer data, commercial negotiations, financial information or personnel matters.

The situation becomes even more complex as organisations begin adopting autonomous AI agents capable of interacting with multiple applications and performing tasks independently.

As examined in Tech Trends’ recent expert analysis, monitoring an AI agent is not the same as being able to stop it.

While visibility into AI activity is essential, businesses also need mechanisms to revoke permissions, halt delegated tasks and independently verify that automated systems remain within their authorised boundaries.

For organisations already struggling to track employee use of conventional AI chatbots, the emergence of increasingly autonomous systems adds another layer of complexity.

The Rise of AI Content Disguising Tools

Beyond hiding conversations and bypassing restrictions, Acora also examined the growing popularity of tools designed to make AI-generated writing appear more human.

These so-called AI humanisers are increasingly marketed as ways to rewrite machine-generated content so that it is less likely to be identified by AI detection systems.

Although much of the demand may originate from students, the popularity of these tools illustrates another challenge for organisations attempting to establish transparency around AI-generated work.

If employees use AI to produce reports, presentations or other business materials without disclosure, managers may find it difficult to assess whether the information has been independently verified.

The issue is not necessarily the use of AI itself, but the absence of appropriate review and accountability.

AI-generated content can contain factual inaccuracies, misleading references or confidential information that should not have been included.

Disguising its origins may make those problems harder to identify.

However, AI detection tools themselves are not consistently reliable, meaning that attempts to distinguish human-written from machine-generated content can also produce misleading results.

For businesses, establishing clear expectations around disclosure, verification and accountability may therefore be more effective than relying exclusively on automated detection.

Why AI Governance Needs More Than Restrictions

For businesses, the findings suggest that traditional approaches to technology governance may be insufficient.

Simply prohibiting certain AI tools does not eliminate employee demand for the technology.

Instead, restrictive policies without practical alternatives may encourage employees to seek less visible solutions.

Acora argues that organisations should use periods of slower AI deployment to improve their understanding of how employees are already using the technology.

This includes identifying AI applications accessed through corporate networks, reviewing browser extensions and examining AI capabilities embedded within existing software.

Businesses also need clearer policies explaining which information employees can share with AI systems and which tools are approved for particular tasks.

Training remains an important consideration.

Employees may understand that certain information is confidential without appreciating how generative AI systems process prompts, retain conversation histories or interact with external services.

Providing practical guidance about acceptable AI use can help reduce accidental data exposure while enabling employees to benefit from the technology.

Businesses should also consider whether existing approved tools adequately meet employee needs.

If staff consistently seek alternative AI services, this may indicate gaps in functionality, accessibility or usability rather than deliberate disregard for security policies.

Providing employees with secure, effective alternatives to consumer AI tools could reduce incentives to circumvent restrictions.

For example, enterprise AI deployments can be configured with appropriate access controls and data governance measures, helping organisations support productivity while maintaining oversight.

However, these safeguards require ongoing management as AI platforms introduce new features and capabilities.

Finding the Balance Between Innovation and Security

The broader implications of Acora’s findings extend beyond the UK.

As generative AI becomes increasingly integrated into everyday professional workflows, organisations worldwide face similar questions about how to encourage innovation without compromising security.

The challenge is particularly significant because AI adoption is no longer confined to dedicated technology teams.

Employees across marketing, finance, human resources, legal services and customer support can now access powerful AI capabilities through ordinary web browsers.

That accessibility makes AI difficult to govern using conventional software approval processes alone.

The findings also highlight an important distinction between having access to artificial intelligence and being adequately prepared to use it.

As Tech Trends recently reported in its coverage of the UK’s position in a Commonwealth AI readiness study, technological infrastructure alone is insufficient to ensure that individuals and organisations can realise the benefits of AI.

Skills development, responsible adoption and appropriate governance are equally important.

Rather than treating employee AI usage exclusively as a compliance problem, businesses may need to recognise it as evidence of genuine demand for more efficient ways of working.

Understanding why employees turn to unauthorised tools could help organisations identify opportunities to improve their approved technology offerings.

At the same time, clear accountability, appropriate training and transparent data handling policies remain essential.

Ultimately, Acora’s research highlights an uncomfortable possibility for businesses attempting to slow their AI adoption.

The decision to pause an official AI rollout does not necessarily mean employees will stop experimenting with the technology.

Without effective governance and practical alternatives, organisations risk creating an environment where AI usage continues to expand, but increasingly outside their visibility and control.

The challenge for business leaders is therefore not simply deciding whether to adopt AI, but ensuring that adoption happens safely, transparently and with sufficient oversight.

The post UK Searches for Hiding AI Use at Work Surge 489% as Businesses Pause Adoption appeared first on Tech Trends.

A new study of seven smart glasses brands reveals extensive app permissions, hidden trackers, and widespread reliance on cloud processing.

As AI-powered smart glasses edge closer to mainstream adoption, their ability to see, hear, and interpret the world around us is raising increasingly uncomfortable questions about privacy.

With Samsung reportedly preparing to launch its first Android XR smart glasses in November, new research from Cybernews suggests that existing manufacturers still have significant work to do when it comes to protecting users’ personal information.

The researchers examined seven smart glasses brands — Meta, Rokid, RayNeo, INMO, Solos, Even Realities, and Halliday — assessing everything from app permissions and tracking technologies to data retention policies and recording indicators.

The findings suggest that privacy risks extend well beyond the possibility of being recorded without consent.

The concerns come as the wearable technology market continues to evolve. As previously explored in TechTrends’ report on the VR and AR device market, manufacturers have long faced challenges in making immersive technology appealing to mainstream consumers. Privacy could become another significant barrier to adoption.

Smart glasses are collecting more than you might think

Among the seven brands examined, Meta stood out for requesting the greatest number of app permissions.

According to the Cybernews analysis, Meta’s companion app requested 70 permissions, including 18 classified as dangerous under Android’s permission system.

These included access to sensitive functions such as audio recording, SMS messages, and external storage.

Although requesting a permission doesn’t necessarily mean an app is misusing it, the sheer number of potential access points highlights the amount of personal information that could be available to smart glasses manufacturers.

Meanwhile, researchers identified six trackers each in the INMO Global and Solos AirGo companion apps.

Rokid was the only app in the study where no trackers were detected.

The cloud privacy problem

Perhaps the most significant finding concerns where AI processing actually happens.

All seven brands examined rely on cloud processing for their AI functionality.

None of the devices analyzed performed core AI tasks, such as voice processing, translation, or image analysis, entirely on the glasses themselves.

This reliance on external infrastructure raises questions about what information leaves the device, where it travels, and how long it remains accessible.

Cloud computing has long played an important role in making immersive technologies more powerful and accessible. As TechTrends previously explored in Scaling Up Immersive Tech With Blockchain, distributing processing workloads beyond individual devices can help overcome hardware limitations.

However, when those workloads involve potentially sensitive personal information, the benefits of cloud processing must be weighed against the associated privacy implications.

For consumers increasingly accustomed to AI assistants embedded in everyday devices, understanding these data flows could become an important consideration when choosing wearable technology.

When the recording light isn’t enough

Smart glasses have already sparked debate over the privacy of people who might be recorded without realizing it.

Recording indicator lights are intended to provide some reassurance, but the Cybernews research identified inconsistencies in how manufacturers handle them.

Only Meta and Rokid were confirmed to respond when their recording indicator lights were covered.

The researchers also found that five of the seven brands failed to specify data retention limits, leaving users with little clarity about how long their information might be stored.

Furthermore, only Meta, Rokid, and Even Realities provided privacy documentation specifically addressing their smart glasses.

Privacy needs to be part of the design

As smart glasses evolve from novelty gadgets into increasingly capable AI-powered wearables, privacy concerns are likely to become harder to ignore.

The technology promises considerable benefits, from real-time translation and hands-free assistance to more accessible ways of interacting with digital information.

Indeed, as explored in our recent article on turning biometric data into immersive VR experiences, the combination of wearable sensors and immersive technology is opening up new possibilities for personalized digital experiences.

But these capabilities also highlight how much increasingly intimate information wearable devices can potentially collect and process.

The challenges are not entirely new. As TechTrends previously reported in its coverage of Microsoft’s HoloLens technology, immersive headsets have long relied on sophisticated combinations of cameras, microphones, and environmental sensors to interpret their surroundings.

As these technologies become smaller, more discreet, and more widely adopted, questions about transparency and consent become increasingly important.

The Cybernews findings underline an important challenge for the industry: making smart glasses genuinely useful without turning them into another source of opaque personal data collection.

For manufacturers hoping to bring AI eyewear into everyday life, transparency around permissions, processing, and data retention may prove just as important as the technology itself.

The post Exposing the hidden privacy risks of AI smart glasses appeared first on Tech Trends.

It’s rare to find an app where even the free version is also free of advertisement. So what’s the catch? Surely it profits from user data in some way, there’s no such thing as a free lunch in tech…

In a nutshell, Camo is an app that turns your smartphone into a webcam
Share on X

Yet according to Camo’s Founder Aidan Fitzpatrick, the app’s strict no-tracking policy is a point of principle, and there is, in fact, no need for such intrusion into user privacy. Enough of their users are happy to pay the very reasonable $4.99 a month for the “Pro version” to fund the free app as well.

In a nutshell, Camo is an app that turns your smartphone into a webcam. Like all great tech ideas, it’s a simple concept, well-executed.

Even cameras in older phones are much better than any webcam on the market, so by using that old phone sitting in your drawer doing nothing as a webcam, you can get next-level video quality.

A big part of the harm consumers face with advertising is their data, demographics, and tracking running across the web
Share on X

The app has been used by the likes of Seth Godin, Wall St Journal’s Joanna Stern plus employees from Harvard, Stanford and Oxford Universities, who praise it for its ability to create a professional-quality webcam experience from the user’s phone and browser.

“I’ve spent years building products to help people get better access to their own data,” says Fitzpatrick, who founded his company Reincubate in 2008 after building the world’s first tool for iOS data recovery, which enabled users to securely manage their data.

Camo’s Founder Aidan Fitzpatrick is a software engineer, angel investor, entrepreneur, and author who started his first company at 14

There's a huge amount of competition by unworthy publishers, trying to rank low-quality services or information
Share on X

Working in that space for so long gave him many opportunities to see the more distasteful ways to use data, and the wide range of bad actors out there looking to get access to it, he explains as he unpacks how important the issue is to him.

“The internet has played a big role in my life and my career, and it’s in almost everyone’s interests to push it along the responsible, sustainable path of public good rather than narrow, private interests.”

Fighting Fakery

Fitzpatrick talks about the idea that consumers on the web these days are surrounded by “fakery.”

Yet while some forms of fakery — fake news, fakery in public discourse, and the use of trolls to attack viewpoints on social media – have been widely discussed, there is a lot more to it than that, he explains.

“Fakery pays off for the unethical. Amazon and other platforms have received coverage for fake product reviews on their platforms. Instagram is busy with promoted products, many of which use fake reviews and undisclosed influencer endorsements. Sometimes even the products themselves are fake.”

Even cameras in older phones are much better than any webcam on the market
Share on X

“More broadly, consumers have experience with this fakery on Google. There are some Google searches that are just hard to do. Have you ever tried searching for a plumber or medical advice on Google?  There’s a huge amount of competition by unworthy publishers, trying to rank low-quality services or information.”

Even services like Grubhub and Postmates have been criticized for allegedly faking profiles for restaurants that they don’t partner with, in an attempt to capture and redirect their leads. “A big part of the harm consumers face with advertising is their data, demographics, and tracking running across the web,” says Fitzpatrick

Making it Pay

While Fitzpatrick believes that consumer privacy and choice have been jeopardized by large web corporations and social media giants, he recognizes that they must make money.

His argument, however, is that there is no need for such companies to be so data-hungry in capturing and monetizing information about their users. It is, in fact, still possible for them to build effective first-party advertising networks with a smaller set of data.

“Paid services along the lines that Apple focuses on, or which Google have explored with YouTube Music may prove increasingly worthwhile.”

And of course, his own product manages to make money without storing and tracking consumer data:

“Our model is very simple: we offer a free version of our products, and a paid version. We’ve no need to track data for trials, or to try and monetize with ads baked into our products, so we don’t.”

Algorithm Anarchy

He breaks down this disruptive rationale into three key areas that those designing tech products must think about to enable consumers to have more authentic experiences online:

1. Product: We don’t track user data in the products. We have no need to, and no interest in doing so. People’s data belongs to them. If the app fails, we do record information on what went wrong, but that’s clearly metadata, and about the functioning of the product in order that we can improve it, rather than anything about the customer. Where we record limited metadata on how the app is used, we only do for the purpose of better understanding and developing our own product — not for marketing — and we don’t share that information with any third parties.
2. Customer Records: If you buy something from a company, what data do they collect? We ask for the UK’s statutory minimum. We need their email and country of residence in order to send them the license and to apply the correct taxes. We use a third-party for card-processing, and don’t have any card details. In the UK we have to keep financial records for at least 6 years, but where users have lifetime licenses we need to keep that data for at least that time. Fortunately, it’s a very narrow set of data.
3. Marketing: This is hard because overreach in data capture feels like the norm. Most systems that permit advertising ask customers to embed tracking tools in their mobile or desktop apps or on their sites, and this is something we push back on. We don’t embed any advertising analytics tools in our products for this reason. Then there’s visitor tracking. We do use an analytics product to count the number of visitors to our site, and we’ve more work to do as the industry evolves to get ourselves happier with how these systems work. We’ve made good progress.

“The tech industry often assumes that using particular channels to market a product requires tracking. We reject that. Reincubate will continue to safeguard consumer privacy and choice with our commitment to respect privacy, refuse data monetization and intrusive tracking.”

Camo key features include:

• Film-quality video
• Easy customizing:  lighting, crop, zoom, focus, at your fingertips
• Plug and play
• Plays well with others:  use with Zoom, Meet, Teams, Skype, Slack, Google Chrome, Cisco Webex Meetings  +.
• Previews before going live
• The newly released 1.3 version offers even better functionality, including support for an additional 11 languages supported, power conservation, and screen aesthetic features.

Camo’s free edition is great for straightforward, high-quality calls, but lacks adjustments. It gives you resolutions up to and including 720p video, along with a choice of the device’s selfie lens, or it’s main back lens (the wide one). The free version of Camo also lets you access your device’s audio, and keep the screen of your device dimmed while using Camo. With free version, you can also connect multiple iOS devices and switch between them.

If you upgrade to Camo Pro, you get the following:

• Access to every lens on your phone (such as selfie, telephoto, ultra-wide & wide)
• “Portrait mode” on iPhone’s that support it, with bokeh effect and shallow depth-of-field
• Control of the device’s flash for use as a light ( turn it on and off, control the brightness)
• Access to any resolution the device provides (opening up 1080p and 1440 x 1080)
• Video mirroring
• Rotation of the feed in 90° increments (in case your phone is orientation locked)
• Zoom controls, with pan and tilt to keep you front and centre
• Focus adjustments (autofocus, focus on a particular area, manual focus control)
• Shutter speed and ISO adjustments
• Image adjustments including brightness, temperature, tint, hue, saturation, contrast, gamma, sharpness

Alice Bonasio is a technology journalist, communications consultant and Tech Trends’ Editor in Chief. Connect with her on LinkedIn and follow @alicebonasio and @techtrends_tech on Twitter.

The post How Algorithm Anarchy Can Set You Free appeared first on Tech Trends.

By Daniel Markuson, Digital Privacy Expert at NordVPN.

422.49 billion spam emails are sent worldwide every day. This number also includes phishing, sextortion, advertising, and finance-related scams. Most people can already spot the traditional spam messages that claim they have won a new Lamborghini or inherited a million dollars, so spammers are finding new creative ways to trick people into giving them money or information.

There has been an increase in the numbers of SMS spamming attacks known as smishing
Share on X

With so much personal data available out there, it is much easier for criminals to customize all kinds of scamming attempts – from simple spam, to much more advanced phishing or extortion. These emails, messages, and websites often seem so real, and provide such a high level of detail, as to make even the most cautious person susceptible to falling into a trap.

A few months ago, a massive smishing attack produced tens of millions of fake SMS messages, inviting the recipients to go on fake websites
Share on X

A New Era of Smishing

Recently, there has been an increase in the numbers of SMS spamming attacks, known as “smishing” where scammers try o steal people’s personal information or credit card details. They do this by initially sending text messages designed to look like they come from a bank, an employer, or an official governmental institution.

422.49 billion spam emails are sent worldwide every day
Share on X

A few months ago, a massive smishing attack produced tens of millions of fake SMS messages, inviting the recipients to go on fake websites. The texts were generated by a spam-sending database run by a company called ApexSMS. Interestingly, the system was able to detect when people messaged back using keywords such as “report” and “FCC. These phone numbers were added to a special list of contacts that would not be used by the fraudsters again. However, you should bear in mind that responding to these kinds of texts may leave you vulnerable to identity theft because if you contact the hackers, the hacked phone transmits your sensitive data stored on it.

Responding to a text can leave your phone vulnerable to being hacked
Share on X

As investigators later discovered, the database contained around 80 million records. They included people’s names, phone numbers, carrier network names, IP addresses, and even locations. Out of the 38 million texts. that were sent during the attack, 2.1 million people clicked on a link in the fraudulent message. Luckily on this occasion, the scammers used an unprotected server, which experts discovered in time to stop the attack.

Scammers are abusing Notifications and Push APIs on Android devices
Share on X

Fake Missed Calls

Besides SMS frauds, scammers are now abusing the Notifications and Push APIs on Android devices. These two APIs are used to push notifications on mobile phones to re-engage users. An application or server can push them even if the app is not running. The problem is, the API allows scammers to make their notifications look identical to a legitimate app. For example, they can create fake alerts customized to look like a missed phone call.

Scammers aim to take advantage of well-known applications by creating false alerts using the looks of popular apps
Share on X

One of the ways scammers exploit the feature is using Google Chrome to push messages to mobile phones. To hide their origin, the Google Chrome icon is changed into a “Missed Call” notification. When this happens, one message informs the scammers that they can hack the phone. Another one shows a missed call from a medium called Esmeralda.

Once users press the fake push notification, their phones get hacked
Share on X

Scammers aim to take advantage of well-known applications. They create false alerts using the looks of popular apps. This confuses mobile phone users. Once they press the push notification, their phones get hacked. Thus, before pressing the notification, it is important to pay attention to the message that it contains and think if it is actually related to the nature of the app.

While fraudsters are becoming more creative, it is still possible to save ourselves from their attacks by becoming more aware of the latest scamming techniques
Share on X

Phishing with legal threats

Another new strategy that creative spammers are now using is lawsuit emails. They send fake emails, which claim that the recipient is being sued and request to open and read the attached fraudulent documents and respond within seven days.The scammers use the names of existing law firms and falsify their email addresses. Most of the time, they target the employees of big companies. Around 100,000 businesses have been attacked to date — mostly in Canada.

Around 100,000 businesses have been attacked to date with legal threat phishing scams — mostly in Canada
Share on X

Steps anyone can take to protect themselves

While fraudsters are becoming more creative, it is still possible to save ourselves from their attacks by becoming more aware of the latest scamming techniques. Then, it is crucial to check the messages, phone calls, and emails you receive before opening them. These are the basic but important steps in protecting ourselves handing our personal data to scammers.

The post Expert View: Spam and Phishing Trends appeared first on Tech Trends.

“Mozilla has taken advantage of the Quest’s higher performance capabilities to deliver the best VR web browsing experience to date,” says Janice Von Itter, Staff Program Manager at Mozilla.

This follows from the release of the Firefox Reality browser for other 6DoF (Six Degrees of Freedom) headsets including the HTC Vive Focus Plus and Lenovo Mirage.

Firefox Reality is available in 10 different languages, including Japanese, Korean, Simplified Chinese and Traditional Chinese, with more on the way
Share on X

Firefox Reality is available in 10 different languages, including Japanese, Korean, Simplified Chinese and Traditional Chinese, with more on the way. Voice search is also enabled to make browsing faster and easier.

Voice search is also enabled to make browsing faster and easier
Share on X

Whether you’re watching immersive video or meeting up with friends in Mozilla Hubs, Firefox Reality takes advantage of the Oculus Quest’s boost in performance and capabilities to deliver the best VR web browsing experience.

You can now try the new featured content on the FxR home page or build your own to see what you can do in the next generation of standalone virtual reality headsets.

Firefox Reality takes advantage of the Oculus Quest’s boost in performance to deliver the best VR web browsing experience
Share on X

Like all Firefox browser products, Firefox Reality is available for free and users can get it now from the Oculus Quest store. In the coming months Firefox will also be rolling out support for the nearly VR-ready WebXR specification, multi-window browsing, bookmarks sync, additional language support and other exciting new features.

Like all Firefox browser products, Firefox Reality is available for free
Share on X

Privacy Please

Enhanced Tracking Protection on the Firefox Reality browser automatically blocks sites from tracking you, and the icing on the cake is that all these protections work unobtrusively in the background and actually make the browsing experience faster.

“To protect our users from the pervasive tracking and collection of personal data by ad networks and tech companies, Firefox Reality has Enhanced Tracking Protection enabled by default. We strongly believe privacy shouldn’t be relegated to optional settings,” says Von Itter.

This is part of a broader move by the company to make all of its browser versions much more privacy (and user) friendly and set a new standard for the industry where it come to protecting our data
Share on X

“What if I told you that on nearly every single website you visit, data about you was transmitted to dozens or even hundreds of companies, all so that the website could earn an additional $0.00008 per ad!” asks Peter Dolanjski. Product Lead, Privacy & Security at Firefox, who says their research has shown that Firefox users are seeking out privacy protection, particularly through the use of Firefox’s Private Browsing mode. In fact, nearly 25% of web page loads in Firefox take place in a Private Browsing window. The good news for these users is that Firefox’s Private Browsing mode has long put users first by blocking tracking. Yet privacy features such as Chrome’s Incognito mode do not actually prevent third-party tracking, and a recent study found that users don’t understand this and think their data is being protected, when it is, in fact, anything but.

The hope is that by setting a new standard they will force the tech industry at large to also change and put the user’s interest first
Share on X

This approach will not come as a surprise to anybody familiar with Mozilla. A while back Tech Trends covered a story about The Glass Room – Mozilla’s Black Mirror-like installation in London – which used a range of creative installations to force users to confront their complex relationship wth data, privacy and identity, and to open their eyes to how closely the companies they interact with are monitoring their every move.

The burden of due diligence, according to the Mozilla ethos, needs to shift from the consumers to the companies
Share on X

The burden of due diligence, according to the Mozilla ethos, needs to shift from the consumers to the companies whereby the complexity of privacy settings shouldn’t be placed on users to figure out. The approach taken by Firefox is beautifully simple: align your product with customer expectations rather than the other way around. They are now rolling out enhanced tracking protection on the browser, so that new and existing Firefox users will have much stronger privacy protection on their default settings from the moment they install. The hope is that by setting a new standard they will force the tech industry at large to also change and put the user’s interest first, because, as they put it, “consumers deserve better.”

After Cambridge Analytica and other debacles over recent months and years, I don’t think many people can disagree with that.

Tech Trends offers a broad range of Digital Consultancy services to guide companies, individuals and brands in effectively leveraging existing and emerging technologies in their business strategy.

Alice Bonasio is a VR and Digital Transformation Consultant and Tech Trends’ Editor in Chief. She also regularly writes for Fast Company, Ars Technica, Quartz, Wired and others. Connect with her on LinkedIn and follow @alicebonasio on Twitter.

The post Firefox Reality Launches on the Oculus Quest appeared first on Tech Trends.

The past months have seen scandals emerge that have demonstrated to Brits the value their data holds, and the risks that come with giving it away so freely.

By Gary McKay, Co-founder of APPII

With privacy becoming an increasing concern, but users reluctant to sacrifice the ease of use that Internet freedom allows them, blockchain offers a solution to reconcile data protection with simplicity without the need for regulation.

Until recently, we gave our data away because we either didn’t realise we were doing so, or because we perceive it to be a small price to pay
Share on X

Cambridge Analytica demonstrated not only how efficacious harnessing seemingly useless data can be in producing real world results, but also how easily data can be collected unknowingly from online users. Another UK company Carphone Warehouse was fined in January of this year for having historically stored customer data using insufficient security measures, as was discovered when the data was stolen by hackers. This shows that even data that was collected legally and for the direct purpose of buying a phone contract can be used later for nefarious purposes such as identity theft.

Until recently, we have given our data away because we either didn’t realise we were doing so, or because we perceive it to be a small price to pay for an easy transaction. Data that holds value for all sorts of companies can be collected from any manner of online interactions; from a baking video you liked on Facebook, to the tube stop that you tap in at every morning with your contactless card.

We want to have more control over our data and how it is used without sacrificing the ease that sharing it allows us to operate with
Share on X

We want to have more control over our data and how it is used, but we don’t want to sacrifice the ease and simplicity that sharing it allows us to operate with. The problem is that actively controlling where your data does and does not exist is a laborious and time-consuming process. It could mean always entering your details manually on a new platform every time you log in rather than just using your Facebook credentials. Alternatively, it could mean exercising your GDPR-given right to manually ask every company you suspect might be storing your data to ‘forget’ you.

Blockchain relies on sophisticated cryptography to ensure that all the data it stores is safely encrypted
Share on X

It is clearly time for a shift in the way we view our data, and crucially, the way we secure it. Blockchain technology provides a solution that safeguards data without sacrificing any of the functionality that a free and open Internet provides. Blockchain is essentially a vast, distributed, ledger where data is stored across a web of different devices, rather than in one centralised place that makes it vulnerable to hacking. Most essentially, blockchain relies on sophisticated cryptography to ensure that all the data it stores is safely encrypted.

It is clearly time for a shift in the way we view and secure our data
Share on X

As has been well-documented over the last year or so, the real-life applications of blockchain are myriad and diverse and will therefore replace the methods by which we currently share our data in many, many cases. Rather than sharing our information with every online shop or platform, we can store our data on a blockchain. This combats the problem in several ways. Firstly, distributed across many different devices (the data on each of which is futile in itself,) the information is not stored in one centralised place where it is at risk of an external security breach. Secondly, the information is encrypted and can easily be secured by biometric identification, meaning that only you would ever be able to access and share it.

Cambridge Analytica demonstrated not only how efficacious harnessing seemingly useless data can be in producing real world results, but also how easily data can be collected unknowingly from online users
Share on X

To put this into context, take the recruitment industry. Candidates share reams of confidential data with recruiters and potential employers during the job-hunting process. This sort of data is extremely valuable in many different ways and, as such, is a target for hackers. Blockchain CVs already exist – candidates can enter their qualification and employment history on to the blockchain. Once it is verified by the institutions where that person enrolled or qualified, the CV is secured immutably.

Candidates share reams of confidential data with recruiters and potential employers during the job-hunting process
Share on X

Candidates can then apply for jobs with a CV that is trusted and credible but; moreover, they are safe in the knowledge that their data is securely held. They can use their own biometric data to share the data they want, when they want, and they can employ smart contracts to dictate how long their data is accessible to the people they’ve shared it with, such as recruiters or potential employers.

Blockchain CVs already exist
Share on X

This is just one example of the endless possibilities blockchain has in revolutionising the way we view security and data sharing, without compromising on the ease and openness that the Internet is synonymous with. By encrypting data and allowing the owner full control over when and how it is shared, blockchain offers the solution to an increasingly pressing issue.

The post Expert View: Reconciling Privacy and Internet Freedom with Blockchain appeared first on Tech Trends.

January 28^th was national data privacy day, and with Valentines’s day fast approaching we take the opportunity to match up – see what I did there – the two themes in this handy infographic, which looks at Data Privacy (or the lack thereof) in the thorny world of online dating.

Online Dating and Data Privacy don't seem to be happy bedfellows
Share on X

Date privacy in online dating, courtesy of Saucydates.com

The post Infographic: Data Privacy and Online Dating appeared first on Tech Trends.