Cmgt 441 Week 2
Evaluating Writing Paper
CMGT/441
Professor: Dr. Shive Bhagan
May 26, 2012
University of Phoenix
Author 's Name: Doug Gross
Author 's Title or Position: Tech
Author 's Organizational Affiliation: Facebook Users
Date of Page Creation or Version: May 11, 2011
Introduction The article on Facebook apps leaked users’ information, security. Lawmakers says that hundreds of thousands apps may have gotten access tokens to user personal information into the hands of unauthorized parties. Supposedly the company has corrected the issue. This article will be evaluated on its usefulness and validity or appropriateness. After carefully reviewing the article critics will be able to evaluate the paper accordingly. The usefulness of the article support the augment to how Facebook apps leaked users’ information however, the augment does not show or has proof whether or not it is true and if so the article do not state how much information as leaked and who the information was leaked to. Here are some examples of my survey results: * Third parties * Mainly advertisers * Users’ profile * Photographs * Chat * Personal information * Symantec’s has reported inaccuracies
The information that can be challenged is that Symantec to address the problem but there has not been a thorough investigation that shows any information got into the hands of unauthorized parties. The author should that information provided misinterpret and was not thoroughly proved. The author showed that the claim to be invalid. On the contrary it showed some frequent bias in some part of the article.
References
CMGT/441
Professor: Dr. Shive Bhagan
May 26, 2012
University of Phoenix
Author 's Name: Doug Gross
Author 's Title or Position: Tech
Author 's Organizational Affiliation: Facebook Users
Date of Page Creation or Version: May 11, 2011
Introduction The article on Facebook apps leaked users’ information, security. Lawmakers says that hundreds of thousands apps may have gotten access tokens to user personal information into the hands of unauthorized parties. Supposedly the company has corrected the issue. This article will be evaluated on its usefulness and validity or appropriateness. After carefully reviewing the article critics will be able to evaluate the paper accordingly. The usefulness of the article support the augment to how Facebook apps leaked users’ information however, the augment does not show or has proof whether or not it is true and if so the article do not state how much information as leaked and who the information was leaked to. Here are some examples of my survey results: * Third parties * Mainly advertisers * Users’ profile * Photographs * Chat * Personal information * Symantec’s has reported inaccuracies
The information that can be challenged is that Symantec to address the problem but there has not been a thorough investigation that shows any information got into the hands of unauthorized parties. The author should that information provided misinterpret and was not thoroughly proved. The author showed that the claim to be invalid. On the contrary it showed some frequent bias in some part of the article.
References
References: http://articles.cnn.com/2011-05-11/tech/facebook.information.leak_1_facebook-accounts-facebook-platform-facebook-users?_s=PM:TECH