Saturday, November 9, 2019

Thor AntiVirus (Heimdal Security - Worldwide) Up to 70% Off

Antivirus Thor Premium Home Heimdal Security Anti-Malware Internet Security Anti-virus Phishing Ransomware Threat Detection Spyware Adware Anti-Phishing Viruses Malicious URLs Internet Security Test Windows Defender Antivirus Microsoft Microsoft Windows 10 Windows 8 Windows 7 Windows XP Cloud protection Zero-day malware protection Real Time Protection Heuristic / Behavior-based Scanning Sandbox Real-time Cloud Scanning Web Threat Protection

  • Antivirus
  • Thor Premium Home#1
  • Heimdal Security
  • Anti-Malware
  • Internet Security
  • Anti-virus
  • Phishing
  • Ransomware
  • Threat Detection
  • Spyware
  • Adware
  • Anti-Phishing
  • Viruses
  • Malicious URLs
  • Internet Security Test
  • Windows Defender Antivirus
  • Microsoft
  • Microsoft Windows 10
  • Windows 8
  • Windows 7
  • Windows XP
  • Cloud protection
  • Zero-day malware protection
  • Real Time Protection
  • Heuristic / Behavior-based Scanning
  • Sandbox
  • Real-time Cloud Scanning
  • Web Threat Protection

Monday, November 4, 2019

How Digital Agencies Can Prepare For Upcoming Cybersecurity Threats

Computer hacker with mobile phone.
Security breaches of Experian, Target and even Facebook all occurred during 2017. They made international news because they were “big boys” and worthy of reporting. 2018 took a bit of a different turn. While there were some breaches of major global enterprises (e.g., Facebook, Amazon, HSBC) and a disruptive wave of cyber attacks hitting the energy sector in the Middle East, a large fraction of attacks was staged against much smaller organizations. This is a newer trend in cybercrime, for a very good reason. Smaller organizations have not thought of themselves as targets and thus have not made Security their top priority. 
But when hackers can get into accounts of smaller businesses like digital agencies, think of the information they can obtain. They can steal full client personal information and thus “sell” identities. They can hold those records for ransom. When they get into smaller retailers’ accounts, they can do the same. No business is “small” enough for a targeted attack. So you should come prepared. 
The types of cyber threats to account for in 2019 
Too much connection to mobile. Mobile malware, when downloaded by an unsuspecting user, does not just jeopardize that user’s information but the data of any organization that user patronizes on their mobile device. ZooPark – a new Android malware – made a lot of fuss this year  in several middle-eastern countries.
Wearables and IoT devices. The more devices that are collecting and moving data over the web, the greater the threat of Security breaches. Many of these devices have only minimal Security software, but once a hacker is in, he can move through that device to large stores of data. Smart appliances, for example, allow owners to regulate them from afar. But with each command, there is the chance for an attack. 
BYOD. This has become an increasingly common practice within organizations. Employees bring their own devices to work and are provided passwords, etc. that get them into the IT infrastructure of that organization, but could then be easily stolen by hackers, when users connect with same device to a public network. 
Employee personal use of company devices. It’s not just the PCs in offices. Many employees are provided “company-owned” mobile devices which they also use for personal activities. This is a major pathway for hackers to gain access to an organization’s data.
Essential steps for preventive preparation against new threats 
Continuous employee education and training. The human factor still remains the main cause of most breaches. However, according to a recent report by Deloitte, only 25% of organizations are actually putting preventive Security breach plans in place and enforce those within their companies. Clearly, more education needs to be provided to ensure that your team can spot suspicious activity early on and mitigate the risks. You could invest in yourself or some key employees to take courses in data analytics and Security. It’s also a smart idea for an organization to conduct a penetration testing session that would help establish the “weak links” technology-wise and then train your staff on prevention measures and activities. 
Limit practice of BYOD. Prohibit your key employees, dealing with sensitive data, to use their own devices. Most of the times they become key targets of the elaborate spear phishing email campaigns.
“Hackers can now send very ‘legitimate’ emails, imitating a real person or company – your CEO, a bank, or even a government official,” said Moran Zavdi, CEO of Nucleon. “Such emails often include links or downloads. Once the receiver engages with any of those, the virus file is released and starts roaming through your network. The biggest issue with spear phishing is that 96% of executives worldwide cannot tell the difference between a legitimate email and a malicious one. So, proactive cyber Security, education and training is the best cure here.”
Password Security. Yes, no one likes lengthy or complicated passwords, but they are still the best means against unauthorized network access. Enforce changing passwords often and be certain to block access to any company information on the part of any departing employee. As well, ask everyone to enable two-factor authentication whenever possible. 
Cybercriminals try to stay one step ahead of organizations. As soon as certain Security measures are put into place, they will find ways around them or new methods for hacking. Security
 is not a one-time deal. It is ongoing, all the time. It means staying abreast of the latest types of threats and putting preventative measures into place. It means ongoing analysis of your vulnerabilities and minimizing them. If you do not have the in-house network security experts, its best to hire a firm that does.

Cybersecurity: Under half of organisations are fully prepared to deal with cyberattacks

Under half of organisations believe they're fully ready to respond to a cyberattack or data breach -- despite most senior executives and chief information security officers (CISOs) believing that the threats posed by hacking and other malicious cyber incidents will escalate in 2020 and beyond.
The Cyber Trendscape 2020 report from cybersecurity company FireEye sheds light on how CISOs across the world are feeling about the current cyber threat landscape. The study found that just under half (49%) believe their organisation is fully ready to face a cyberattack or a data breach.
Organisations in the US are most confident about their ability to respond well to a cyberattack, with almost three quarters (72%) of the opinion that they're fully ready. In contrast, just a quarter of organisations in Japan believed they're fully ready to face a cyberattack or data breach.
SEE: A winning strategy for cybersecurity (ZDNet special report) | Download the report as a PDF (TechRepublic)  
Meanwhile, 47% of organisations say they're 'somewhat ready' to handle a cyberattack, but fear there are areas of the business that would struggle to respond well to a hacking incident.
A small number of organisations (4%) say they're not ready to face a cyberattack at all. This might not sound like a large number, but it accounts for one in 25 organisations around the world.
When it comes to cybersecurity, organisations are taking a range of measures to boost protection, with security software, vulnerability management and employee training the most common means of increasing resilience against cyberattacks.
However, only a quarter of organisations believe their cybersecurity training programs can be classed as 'advanced', while just over a third rate training as 'semi-formal' and just under a third say the status of their employee cybersecurity program is 'informal'.
One in ten organisations say they don't have any form of training at all, which could leave them open to cyberattacks -- particularly when it comes to spear-phishing and other hacking techniques that rely on social engineering.
Phishing is regarded as one of the attack types most likely to lead to data breach, with one in five of the CISOs surveyed by FireEye stating that targeted phishing is the most likely malicious activity that could lead to a security incident. Among organisations that have been targeted by a cyberattack in the past 12 months, almost 20% said they had been targeted by a phishing attack.
Malware is also viewed as a big threat to organisations, with around 20% stating it's the most likely cause of a data breach and the same number saying they've been targeted by a malware attack in the last year.
SEE: Thousands of QNAP NAS devices have been infected with the QSnatch malware
When it comes to the source of attacks, hacking groups are what organisations fear most, with a third of organisations of the opinion they're the most likely origin of hacking attempts. That's followed by individual hackers and professional criminal organisations as the second and third most likely sources of attacks.
Globally, nation states are viewed as the least likely origin of cyberattacks -- even ranking behind industry competitors and malicious insiders.
However, there is one country where nation states are viewed as the most likely source of cyberattacks: South Korea. This is due to a fractious relationship with its neighbour North Korea, and Pyongyang's support of malicious cyber activity, which has often targeted South Korea.

Putin’s Top Spy: We’re Teaming Up With D.C. on Cybersecurity

Following a recent conference of foreign security and law enforcement agencies, the head of Russia’s State Security Service, the FSB, made the surprising announcement that Russia and the United States have resumed cooperation on cybersecurity
“We are maintaining working contacts by our experts and special unit heads with the Central Intelligence Agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Drug Enforcement Agency,” said Gen. Alexander Bortnikov, noting that such contacts should always occur, regardless of the foreign policy situation.
Behind-the-scenes cooperation with the Trump administration, particularly when it comes to cybercrime and terrorism, is a theme the Kremlin likes to push onto center stage every so often. And according to our sources there is indeed some consultation at a practical level, but for Washington’s intelligence professionals it’s a very delicate, very dangerous game, complicated enormously by the inclinations and prejudices of President Donald J. Trump.
In response to queries about Bortnikov’s statement, spokespersons for both the CIA and the DEA told The Daily Beast that they had no comment, and the FBI has not responded at all. 
Michael Daniel, CEO of the Cyber Threat Alliance, who was coordinator of  cybersecurity strategy on President Barack Obama’s National Security Council from 2012 to 2017, commented in an email to The Daily Beast that “the U.S. and Russia do have some areas of common interest in cybersecurity where limited cooperation might be beneficial,” and cited the exchange of information on cybercriminals who target both Americans and Russians.  Daniel cautioned, however, that “given Russia’s interference in our electoral process and other on-going conflicts between our countries, any cybersecurity engagement would necessarily be limited.”
“We should all hope that the US officials who are implementing this new agreement are more sophisticated and careful than their President.”
— David Kris,  former U.S. assistant attorney general
In point of fact, the question of security runs up against the realities of Trump administration politics. Even a limited cybersecurity partnership would feed the Trump narrative about the falsity of claims concerning Russia’s election interference and distract from the Kremlin’s recently exposed disinformation campaign to influence our upcoming presidential race. Such cyber-cooperation might also lend legitimacy to the FSB’s known recruitment of criminal organizations to conduct cyber-operations, as well as to its vigorous efforts to suppress free speech on Russia’s internet. And Russia could be afforded the opportunity to gain information on our cyber-capabilities, along with access to our counterintelligence and law enforcement personnel for possible recruitment.
David Kris, assistant attorney general at the National Security Division of the Department of Justice in 2009-11 and the founder of Culper Partners consulting firm, articulated the concern with a sharp edge last week: 
“It is hard not to hear in Mr. Bortnikov’s current statement an echo of Vladimir Putin's prior offer, made onstage in Helsinki, to host members of Bob Mueller’s investigative team in Russia and to assist them through a ‘joint working group on cyber-security, the establishment of which we discussed during our previous contacts.’ As President Putin said then, ‘Any specific material’ indicating Russian election interference that Mueller’s team can produce, ‘we are ready to analyze together.’ At the time, President Trump described this as an ‘incredible offer’ from his Russian counterpart. We should all hope that the US officials who are implementing this new agreement are more sophisticated and careful than their President."
American and Russian cyber-officials have for some time maintained a dialogue in order to reduce the risk of conflict in cyberspace.  In 2013 the United States and Russia signed a landmark agreement that established a Cold War-style “cyber-hotline” between Washington and Moscow.  But rising tensions over Russia's 2014 aggression in Ukraine soured the deal, and the hotline was used by the Obama White House only once, to warn the Kremlin in October 2016 not to attack our 2016 election infrastructure. By then, the hacking, disinformation and trolling by the Russians already had done its job. 
According to an FSB official:  “The first message only came on October 31, 2016... After that there were a number of additions to that with technical information about the hack that had occurred. All of this information was analyzed by us, and even before President Trump’s inauguration, our answer was our comprehensive point of view, directed to the American side."  In other words, the FSB simply denied everything.
In the meantime, CIA Director John Brennan was so alarmed by the Kremlin's election interference that he made a direct telephone call to Bortnikov in August 2016, warning him to back off.  
Moscow and Washington have cooperated on fighting terrorism ever since the 9/11 attacks, when Vladimir Putin endeared himself to the Bush Administration by offering Russian help in hunting down al Qaeda.  Given that terrorist organizations like al Qaeda and the so-called Islamic State use the internet to communicate with supporters and to recruit followers, the joint efforts have involved sharing information about terrorist activities on the internet.  Significantly, Bortnikov noted, without providing details, that “just recently the American secret services provided Russia with information on specific people and plans to carry out terrorist attacks in our country.”
Bortnikov, who famously dismissed Stalin's Great Terror as a result of "excesses at the local level,"  has been in the forefront of Kremlin efforts to cozy up to America's security and law enforcement agencies.  Curiously, as FSB chief since 2008, he is the only one of Russia's security and intelligence chiefs to remain off the U.S. sanctions list, although he was sanctioned by the EU and Canada in 2014 for his role in shaping Kremlin policy regarding the Crimean invasion and support for separatists in Ukraine.  
 In February 2015 Bortnikov was invited to Washington by the White House to participate in a three-day conference on  “countering violent extremism.”  As The Daily Beast noted:  "Bortnikov’s presence was a mutual recognition by the U.S. and Russia that fighting jihadism is a shared challenge between two countries now embroiled in a pitched standoff over the fate of Europe and much else." 
In January 2018, Bortnikov again showed up in the U.S. capital and met, along with SVR (foreign intelligence) chief Sergei Naryshkin, with then CIA chief Mike Pompeo to discuss mutual counter-terrorism efforts.  GRU (military intelligence) chief Igor Korobov came with them, although it was not confirmed that he attended the talks with Pompeo. According to The Washington Post: "Current and former U.S. intelligence officials said they could not recall so many heads of Russia's espionage and security apparatus coming to Washington at once and meeting with a top American official. They worried the Kremlin could conclude the United States is open to forgiving Russia for its actions and was not resolved to forcefully prevent future meddling."  
“Russia keeps aiming for a leaders' level agreement [on cyber security cooperation], hoping it can bypass an intransigent 'deep state' in the United States.”
— Alex Grigsby, Council on Foreign Relations
But reliance on Bortnikov's FSB as an anti-terrorism ally has not played out well for the White House, especially in Syria.  The Russian air campaign there was never directed at ISIS, which includes many fighters from Chechnya. The Kremlin's goal has been to ensure that Syrian President Bassar al-Assad stays in power, not to help the American coalition defeat the Islamic State.  
As for the terrorist threat to the American homeland, the case of Tamerlan Tsarnaev, who carried out the 2013 Boston Marathon bombings with his brother Dzhokhar, also demonstrated that Bortnikov's FSB was a dubious ally.  Tamerlan, who was on the FSB's radar as far back as 2010, travelled to Russia in early 2012 and spent six months with radical Islamists in Dagestan before returning to the U.S. as a global jihadist. Although the FSB had earlier communicated with the FBI about Tamerlan, it never informed U.S. authorities about Tamerlan's sojourn in Russia.  According to an FBI official, had the agency been told, "it would have changed everything."  The FBI would have reassessed Tamerlan and possibly prevented the terrorist attack in Boston.   
Alex Grigsby of the Council on Foreign Relations observed last year: "Russia keeps aiming for a leaders' level agreement [on cybersecurity cooperation], hoping it can bypass an intransigent 'deep state' in the United States bent on stymying efforts at rapprochement, when quieter talks between working-level diplomats might yield greater success." 
In June of this year Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev called for a global effort to counter cyberthreats and chided those countries that are reluctant to cooperate with Russia on cybersecurity, noting that cybercrimes have no national boundaries.  And just in September Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said in an interview: "We have suggested setting up the cybersecurity dialogue to the United States a long time ago, considering that the pile up of false stories in this sphere is absolutely unprecedented. However, there is no clear response so far."  
One is left to wonder if Lavrov is referring to the “false stories” about Russia’s interference in our 2016 elections that Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani and U.S. Attorney General William Barr are looking into.
Given his adoration of Putin, the president of the United States has long favored the idea of cooperating with Russia on cyber-issues.  On July 9, 2017, two days after he met Putin for the first time in Hamburg at the G20, Trump declared on Twitter: "Putin & I discussed forming an impenetrable Cyber Security unit so that election hacking, & many other negative things, will be guarded."  Later that day he apparently had second thoughts, tweeting: "The fact that President Putin and I discussed a Cyber Security unit doesn't mean I think it can happen. It can't-but a ceasefire [in Syria] can,& did!"  
A Russian official who was at the Hamburg summit reported that the discussion of cybersecurity between Putin and Trump had taken up 40 minutes of their two-hour meeting. Trump, for his part, confiscated the interpreter’s notes.
The prospect of joint cyber-efforts raised by Trump’s tweets caused great dismay across the political spectrum in Washington.  Chris Finan, a former director for cybersecurity legislation and policy in Barack Obama's White House, declared the plan to be "strategic idiocy."
“Trump's Department of Homeland Security has made significant cuts in two key task forces of its Cyber Security and Infrastructure Agency.”
Undaunted, Trump and Putin kept the idea alive. Following the July 2018 summit  between the two leaders in Helsinki, when Putin made his “incredible offer” to form a cyber-alliance, a National Security Council spokesman, speaking anonymously to The Washington Post, disclosed that the NSC and its Russian counterparts were “continuing a working-level dialogue” to review suggestions by Putin for a new “cyber-group” and “restarting a counterterrorism group.” 
Meanwhile, last year Bortnikov's FSB  created a powerful new unit for protecting Russia's infrastructure from cyberattacks and thwarting criminal hackers—the so-called National Coordination Center for Computer Incidents (NKTsKI), headed by Andrei Ivashko, formerly head of the FSB's Center for Information Security. 
By contrast, over the past year Trump's Department of Homeland Security has made significant cuts in two key task forces of its Cyber Security and Infrastructure Agency that were created in response to Russian meddling in the 2016 elections for the purpose of protecting election infrastructure and thwarting foreign social media disinformation campaigns.
According to the new FSB center’s deputy chief, Nikolai Murashov, it is actively exchanging data on computer incidents with its partners from 122 countries. "More and more critical information infrastructure facilities have been plugging into our response system and its branches and industry segments are rapidly growing.”  
But the line between sharing computer malware secrets and leaking information on a country's broader cyber-capacities can be a fine one when dealing with Russia, as shown by a huge scandal that hit the FSB in December 2016.   
The deputy head of its now defunct Center for Information Security, Sergei Mikhailov, was arrested, along with two colleagues and an employee of the cybersecurity firm Kaspersky, Ruslan Stoyanov, for allegedly passing secret information to Western intelligence agencies.  (Prosecutors later struck a plea deal with two of those charged, while Mikhailov and Stoyanov were sentenced to long years in prison for treason.)  
“Russia has a powerful hacker underground which often cooperates with the Kremlin and is used as a political tool against the Western financial world.”
The FSB's cybersecurity unit had worked with the FBI and other Western law enforcement agencies for years on an ad hoc basis, occasionally exchanging information about cyber-crime.  But, according to at least one source, Mikhailov and his associates had also revealed to U.S. authorities information about the role of the GRU, a competitor agency, in hacking the DNC and other operations against our 2016 elections.  
In theory, as Michael Daniel suggested,  the United States and Russia could collaborate successfully in the fight against cybercrime, given that the activities of criminal gangs on the internet are a problem that affects countries everywhere. 
The problem is that Russia has a powerful hacker underground which often cooperates with the Kremlin and is used as a political tool against the Western financial world.   According to Russian security expert Alexander Sukharenko: "Russian cybercriminals operate with relative impunity inside Russia as long as they do not breach targets in their own country. In return for such immunity, cybercriminals are often tapped to work for Russia’s intelligence agencies. It is only when Russian hackers travel abroad that they can be detained."  Sukharenko notes that, as of this year, 19 Russian nationals are among the 69 cybercriminals most wanted by American authorities.  
Another problem is that the U.S. and Russia understand the issue of cybersecurity very differently. For the United States, it is primarily the protection of  technology, infrastructure, and people. Russia, in turn, sees cybersecurity as involving state regulation of the content of the internet, which is basically censorship.
The FSB's Bortnikov is a case in point.  In January 2018, A Russian news site,, published an investigation into possible undeclared real estate secretly held by Bortnikov.  Public property records showed that he owned a lavish home and plot of land outside St. Petersburg that he did not report in his official financial declaration.  It did not take long for the federal media watchdog, Roskomnadzor, to blacklist the website for what was supposedly "extremist" content.
In the past five years Russian authorities have introduced laws requiring that social networking sites store users’ personal data on domestic servers and also that messaging apps hand over encryption keys to the FSB. (After the popular messaging service Telegram refused to comply, it was banned by a Russian court in April 2018.  But Telegram has managed, so far, to work around the blockage.) 
“It is unlikely that any form of official cooperation with the Russians would put a stop to the propaganda operations, given how effective they are.”
Last March, Putin signed two laws that strengthened censorship of the internet, one banning "fake news" and the other making it a crime to insult public officials.  On Nov. 1, a so-called “sovereign internet” law went into effect, requiring Russian internet providers to install special tracking software that will enable them to route internet traffic through domestic servers.  The law’s official purpose is to allow the government to isolate the Runet from the World Wide Web in the event of a foreign cyberattack, but it will also give authorities sweeping powers to manage information flows and filter online content.
For the U.S. a primary concern, of course, is the way Russia uses the internet for what were called "active measures" in KGB days–manipulating public opinion in Western democracies through disinformation.  It is unlikely that any form of official cooperation with the Russians would put a stop to these propaganda operations, given how effective they are in furthering the Kremlin's political aims and the fact that the Trump Administration apparently welcomes those that lend it support.  Unfortunately, the White House does not seem to recognize that, for the Kremlin and the FSB, cyberspace is a domain of warfare against anyone, foreign or domestic, who opposes the Putin regime.

Sunday, November 3, 2019

Are You at Risk of Foreign Cyberthreats? If You're a Business Owner, Absolutely

Unfortunately, many small businesses are not properly protected from cyberattacks. Many small to medium-sized business (SMB) owners manage their own websites, lack the resources to invest in a cybersecurity plan, and don't think a security breach will happen to them. The truth is no website is too small to hack. Even the smallest websites get targeted by cybercriminals looking to steal resources like bandwidth, traffic, or visitor data. In fact, a 2018 survey by the small business association SCORE revealed that 43 percent of cyberattacks target small businesses.
International cybercriminals who target U.S. business owners are motivated by many factors. Some want to gain political or economic advantage over the United States, while others want to influence the way American citizens think, behave, or make decisions.
In the age of big data, it's becoming even easier for foreign cybercriminals to intercept our private information. As we continue to introduce more digital devices into our personal lives and businesses, there are a growing number of opportunities for international hackers to target American companies and individuals.
According to SiteLock research, the average website is the target of 62 cyberattacks per day. Depending on their motive, cybercriminals can stealthily launch attacks to damage a website's infrastructure or take a more conspicuous approach to fuel a political agenda.
This stealthy approach commonly involves using malware to insert a backdoor file into a website. Recent SiteLock data indicates that in 2018, 50 percent of malware-infected websites had a backdoor file. Backdoors are malicious codes that are inserted into your website and grant cybercriminals remote access to your site. If the backdoor goes undetected, this type of access can continue for a long time. This means that hackers can repeatedly gain entry to your site and re-infect it many times.
Cybercriminals can also opt for a more conspicuous approach, like launching a defacement attack on your website. In 2018, approximately 15 percent of malware-infected websites were defaced. A defacement attack is when cybercriminals replace your website content with their own images. Defacements function as a kind of graffiti on your website and can be humorous, shocking, or political in nature. Regardless of the approach cybercriminals take, they can seriously damage your website.
Although small businesses are often targeted by international cybercriminals, you can take basic actions to protect your small business website:
Implement a web application firewall (WAF).
A WAF is a proactive solution for monitoring your website traffic. Using a WAF lets you set customized rules to block outside traffic from foreign countries to ensure your website traffic is safe from international cybercriminals. This helps prevent backdoor files and malicious traffic. 
Secure your Wi-Fi connection.
Always use a VPN whenever you or other employees access email and company information using an unsecured Wi-Fi network. A VPN is a secure connection that encrypts your data and transmits it through remote servers, making it much more difficult for international cybercriminals to intercept your company data.
Monitor your website at all times.
Scan your website daily for malware, vulnerabilities, and other suspicious threats. Choose a website security scanner that can automatically remove malware and patch vulnerabilities when detected. This helps to remove any suspicious files such as a backdoor or defacement.
Be cautious of all links and emails.
Phishing emails may look innocuous but are intended to trick you into handing over sensitive information. It's important to be aware of red flags that indicate a possible phishing email, and to be cautious with emails from unknown senders. Avoid clicking on email links or attachments from unknown senders.
Foreign cyberthreats are a major security concern for small business website owners. Implementing basic cybersecurity practices can go a long way in helping to protect your business website from international cybercriminals.

SiteLock releases new VPN solution to protect business and consumer data

SiteLock, the global leader in website security solutions, announced the expansion of its product offering with the launch of SiteLock VPN. SiteLock’s virtual private network offering will help businesses protect all of their online activity from any location.
A VPN is a vital layer of protection that eliminates concerns around employee use of public Wi-Fi, protects data transmitted online, allows businesses to view competitor ad campaigns, and removes content restrictions. For consumers, a VPN is also critical for personal data privacy and protection on public networks, eliminating data throttling and enabling access to content without restriction.
“Websites are the modern small business’s storefront, and protecting those sites from malicious actors has been SiteLock’s core focus,” said Brian Sargent, Vice President of Product at SiteLock. “As hackers become increasingly advanced and remote work grows in popularity, however, the security needs of businesses and their employees continue to expand. We are excited to bring our industry-leading expertise to the VPN market to help our customers respond to these changes with another layer in their cybersecurity strategy.”
SiteLock VPN will help businesses protect their online activities while offering improved security and anonymity. It offers unlimited access across all supported devices to provide an internet free of privacy concerns and content restrictions.
Features of SiteLock VPN include:
  • Superior privacy: No activity logs, DNS leak protection, IP address randomization and 256-bit military-grade encryption ensure user privacy.
  • Fast and easy browsing: More than 1,000 servers in 40+ locations means SiteLock VPN users can browse securely in seconds.
  • Unlimited, multi-device usage: Connect to any SiteLock VPN server at any time, without restrictions or download caps, and use up to five devices at once without having to pay for multiple VPN services.
  • Affordability and support: Combining SiteLock VPN with website security assures the best price on a powerful VPN, as well as access to SiteLock’s U.S.-based support team available 24/7/365.
  • SiteLock VPN, combined with the company’s industry-leading website security solutions, provides an additional layer of protection for business battling the evolving threat landscape.

    SiteLock Named 2019 Red Herring Top 100 North America Winner

    SCOTTSDALE, Ariz., May 22, 2019 /PRNewswire-PRWeb/ -- SiteLock, the global leader in website security solutions, today announced that it has been recognized by Red Herring as a winner of its Top 100 North America 2019 award for security. The award celebrates the continent's most exciting and innovative private technology companies.
    The Red Herring award follows a significant year of growth and achievement for SiteLock. With a continued mission to secure every website on the internet, SiteLock expanded its product portfolio and launched the SiteLock VPN in February. SiteLock also partnered with domain registrar in April. The company expanded its leadership roster earlier this year, too.
    With websites currently experiencing over 62 attacks per day, and the majority of those attacks targeting small and medium businesses, the need for proven cybersecurity solutions that every organization can afford and implement is more important than ever. Leveraging proprietary innovative technology, combined with world-class customer service and support, SiteLock pioneered the website security industry and made enterprise-level solutions accessible and affordable to small and medium-sized businesses (SMB's) worldwide.
    "We're honored to be named a Top 100 North American security company and are excited to see our continued focus and hard work celebrated," said Tom Heiser, Chairman and CEO of SiteLock. "As the threat landscape continues to evolve and become even more sophisticated, small businesses face the same risks as the biggest global corporations. They need comprehensive and reliable cybersecurity solutions to protect their online presence. This recognition is a credit to our talented team, who are all committed to shaping the future of cybersecurity through new technology partnerships and innovative solutions tailored to the SMB market."
    The winners, celebrated at a special awards ceremony at the Westin Pasadena Hotel, have been chosen from thousands of entrants, whittled down to hundreds making the trip to California. The ceremony, led by Red Herring chairman Alex Vieux, was preceded by two days of keynote speeches, discussions and finalist presentations.
    Companies were judged by industry experts, insiders and journalists on a wide variety of criteria including financial performance, innovation, business strategy, and market penetration. Winners ran the gamut of verticals, from FinTech and Marketing to Security, IoT, and many more industries.
    "2019's crop of Top 100 winners has been among our most intriguing yet," said Vieux. "North America has led the way in tech for so many years, and to see such unique, pioneering entrepreneurs and companies here in California, which is in many ways the heartland of the industry, has been a thrilling experience."
    "What has excited me most is to see so many people forging niches in high-tech and cutting edge sectors," added Vieux. "Some of the technical wizardry and first-rate business models showcased here at the conference has been fantastic to learn about. We believe SiteLock embodies the drive, skill and passion on which tech thrives. SiteLock should be proud of its achievement - the competition was incredibly strong."
    Red Herring's editors have been evaluating the world's startups and tech companies for more than two decades. It gives them the ability to see through the industry's hype to pick firms that will continue on a trajectory to success. Brands such as Alibaba, Google, Kakao, Skype, Spotify, Twitter and YouTube have all been singled out in Red Herring's storied history.
    To learn more about SiteLock, its milestones from the previous year, and its industry-leading security solutions, please visit 
    About SiteLock SiteLock, the global leader in website security solutions, is the only provider to offer complete, cloud-based website protection. Its 360-degree monitoring finds and fixes threats, prevents future attacks, enables unrestricted and safe internet browsing, accelerates website performance, and meets PCI compliance standards for businesses of all sizes. Founded in 2008, the company protects over 12 million websites worldwide. For more information, please visit

    SOURCE SiteLock

    Thor AntiVirus (Heimdal Security - Worldwide) Up to 70% Off

    Antivirus   Thor Premium Home   Heimdal Security   Anti-Malware   Internet Security   Anti-virus   Phishing   Ransomware   Threat Detectio...