Let’s get something straight: If someone had time traveled to 1995 and told me that AMD might be able to “save” the laptop market from Apple in 2023 with their chips, I’d immediately ask them It would have been how many drinks they consumed.

After all, the late 1990s were a different time and place for the PC industry. Intel was the undisputed king of the industry – especially in the desktop realm, as laptops were a relatively nascent market – and its company-owned foundry allowed it to release new processors at a cadence that not only impressed but rivaled competitors such as AMD. Also used to keep in the bay.

As someone who worked at Compaq which qualified and marketed AMD processors for its Presario consumer brand PCs as a hedge against Intel’s impenetrable pricing strategy, in my experience, AMD has a lot to work for. Easy had the reputation – but a Keystone Copes masterful for bad, sometimes abysmal, execution.

That’s how quickly things changed after CEO Lisa Siu came to AMD in 2012.

New AMD chips could challenge Apple silicon

Apple shook up the PC world when it started shipping its own chips, Apple Silicon, in late 2020. Intel.

Because Apple owns the entire hardware and software stack, which allows the company to optimize its macOS for enhanced performance, Mac desktops and laptops quickly became hot, in-demand items. While Windows PCs have a higher market share (about 58% versus 30% for macOS), Apple’s sales have steadily increased over the years.

However, the Windows laptop market may get a boost. Recently, AMD unveiled a new laptop CPU for thin and light devices that, according to the company, outperforms Apple’s M2 model from a year ago. Is this a true win for AMD, or is the company selectively focusing on specific performance metrics that distort the real story?

some important background

A few months ago, Intel released its Core i9 13980HX, a “notebook” CPU—a charitable description, at best—that it claimed outperformed Apple’s current fastest processor, the M2 Max. Although accurate claims of performance victories were technically valid in some areas, there were several limitations attached to such claims.

At first, the Intel processor was a highly unusable “notebook” chip because it lost all of its performance benefits the millisecond it ran on the battery and ate up watts like a man lost in the desert dying of thirst. Plus, whenever a notebook does something strenuous it generates a ton of heat to keep the fan running at full capacity. Finally, at almost seven pounds, it wasn’t exactly wide.

Still, it outperformed the M2 Max for some popular but specialized processor-intensive applications with a more powerful video card and frequent plugged-in use while wearing noise-canceling headphones. Although the concessions were a serious temptation for most Apple consumers, Intel struggled to put one of its CPUs on an even playing field.

This type of misstep has resulted in Intel inadvertently assuming that Apple’s M-series is the de facto industry leader, with continued advances in desktop and mobile computing, power and chip efficiency, and integrated graphics capability. Starting with the first M1 machines, Macs became much faster than any Windows PC in daily use, except in dedicated gaming rigs.

It’s AMD’s Time To Step Up To The Plate

The newest member of AMD’s Ryzen 7 family, the 7840U, is the chip the entire PC industry is talking about.

It’s immediately clear that this chip is a far more credible competitor than Intel’s 13980HX. Contrary to Intel’s insidious “notebook” characterization, the 7840U is actually a processor built specifically for thin-and-light laptops. As a result, it should generate less heat and work more effectively, and that’s just for openers.

Since AMD only introduced this new chip in late April, no production machines have used it in real-world testing yet, which is a moot point. Despite this, AMD recently posted a series of vague benchmarks that it says demonstrate greater performance over Apple’s native M2 processor, which is used by the Mac mini, MacBook Air, 13-inch MacBook Pro and two iPad Pros. done in versions.

AMD Ryzen 7840U vs Apple M2

Frankly, it’s still unknown whether the 7840U can maintain this apparently impressive performance on battery and how much battery it uses for comparable workloads as there’s no real system to test it on.

The overly general description of important areas of comparison, the narrow differences between the two chips in all but two categories, and the absence of details and sourcing for any conclusions raise concerns that must be validated in real-life testing.

AMD Ryzen 7040U Series Performance Chart

AMD Ryzen 7 7840U, part of the Ryzen 7040U series, benchmark performance vs Apple’s M2 (Chart credit: AMD)

Even if we accept AMD’s statements on their merits, a closer examination reveals that the company only offers distinct advantages in two of the six areas that its marketing team touts. Chosen as a “proof” of excellence. The other four results can be essentially bounded within the benchmark test margin of error.

Without question, real-world testing on real equipment can differ greatly from the marketing department’s benchmarks. Still, based on these and other early findings, there’s some evidence that AMD appears to have credibly — if only partially — challenged Apple’s M2 hegemony and significantly edged out Intel’s Core i9 13980HX. Which raises even more questions behind Intel.

With that in mind, the Ryzen 7 7840U is a fully integrated laptop chip that looks to compete with the base M2 processor and perhaps the M2 Pro in some areas. This is quite an achievement.

Even though the benchmarking suite scores are competitive, there are other things to consider, as games I tried to play on the Intel Core i9 13980HX laptop experienced a dramatic performance degradation when forced to operate on battery power.

closing thoughts

It’s too early to declare AMD’s 7784u as the new heavyweight champion, competing favorably with or even surpassing Apple’s M2.

From a reputational perspective, AMD recognizes the stakes here. We must assume that AMD measured the metrics for their comparison table under the laptop’s optimal conditions: when connected to AC power and without considering factors such as heat and battery consumption. From my point of view, this approach looks completely logical.

But let’s be clear. My conversations with AMD confirm that the company is working overtime to produce the best performing silicon possible. In my discussions with AMD executives, they are not dismissing Apple’s engineering capability (unlike Intel).

The post-pandemic PC market is currently in a growth funk, something that’s unlikely to change for several quarters. Companies like HP, Dell, and Lenovo have created some of the most beautiful laptop designs we’ve seen in years. However, without best-in-class chips, consumer and corporate customers may be inclined to consider non-Windows alternatives, despite the generally higher prices for Apple products.

If AMD’s 7840U turns out to be as advertised, it will give Windows laptops a much-needed jolt of adrenaline. No one likes any company, including Apple, to operate without competition, and AMD’s work here could be music to customers’ ears.

Puppy Linux is a niche computing solution that reflects the flexibility and usefulness of open-source tools and the staying power of the Linux operating system.

Usually in this column, I focus on new versions of Linux distros that introduce new tricks and features. But the current version of Puppy Linux, FossaPup64 version 9.5, is not a new release. It replaced the Precise Puppy version in 2020.

FossaPup64 provides a safe and secure Linux platform optimized for single-user settings. It is a modular distribution, which very few Linux distros offer. You can seamlessly swap out newer versions of the Linux kernel, firmware, and apps to keep the installation fresh. Its lightweight design packs full functionality, no matter how many ways you choose to use it.

One of the main features of Puppy Linux is its ability to provide a reliable and fast portable computing platform. Pop Puppy Linux into any computer’s USB drive to boot straight into your last computing session. Or do a thrifty install on your desktop or laptop computer to boot from a USB stick or CD and save settings and data without disturbing the existing operating system.

FossaPup loads into the computer’s RAM. It runs Linux and apps much faster than the old computer could otherwise handle. When you turn off the computer and remove the USB stick, no trace of your computing session is left behind.

This Pocket Linux approach is a great way to revive an older computer that no longer runs the updated Microsoft Windows. It also empowers newer, more powerful computers to improve their operating speed. Running in RAM is fast on any computer.

longevity matters

Barry Kauler, the founder of the Puppy Linux project, introduced the original Puppy Linux distro in July 2003. He developed the concept into various experimental variants. A few years ago, Kauler moved out of the Puppy Linux development role to release other Linux systems. In the meantime, the Puppy Linux community keeps Puppy Linux playful and barking.

I stumbled upon Puppy Linux in 2006 when I started my crush on using Linux. For years, I relied heavily on its pocket computing power. It remains an invaluable backup tool and keeps many older computers up and running.

A recent encounter with an ailing computer—which I mention below—reminded me that well-designed OSes don’t always have to be upgraded two or three times a year. Many Linux distros only upgrade infrequently.

I’ve used various versions of the mainline Puppy Linux distro over the years. Its ability to boot from a 2GB USB disk was a great solution for dragging my heavy laptop around or using someone else’s non-Linux computer.

what’s inside

Today, installing FossaPup Linux on a large-capacity USB stick is child’s play. It remains my primary go-to Linux OS whenever I need a quick fix to revive an ailing PC or perform tasks elsewhere on site.

Puppy Linux has a different look and feel. Several versions—called puplets—remain in circulation. They cater to different user and hardware needs.

Puppy Linux uses a combination of JWM (Joe’s Window Manager) and ROX-Filer to create a uniquely fast and easy-to-use desktop environment, making FossaPup – and other Puppy Linux variants – one of the most lightweight Linux OS out there.

Puppy Linus FossaPup Desktop

Puppy Linux uses a unique combination of JWM and Rox-Filer to create a powerful, lightweight Linux desktop.

FossaPup64 is built using the Ubuntu focal fossa (64-bit) package. This gives it binary compatibility with Ubuntu and access to the Ubuntu focal Fossa repository.

FossaPup is not an unofficial derivative of the Ubuntu software family. Like other Puppy projects, FossaPup is completely built from the ground up with an in-house distro construction tool called Woof-CE. It bears no resemblance to the traditional Ubuntu skin.

remedy for dead hardware

A recent panic call from a neighbor reminded me why I prefer Puppy Linux, despite the vast majority of Linux distros I use.

A work-at-home neighbor, which means no tech support, suffered a seriously bad computer just hours before a work project.

Yes, it was Windows! But in fairness, sometimes the same thing happens with Linux.

The computer wouldn’t boot once it was on, and all the digital content my neighbor desperately needed was locked inside an inaccessible hard drive.

I caught my FossaPuppy on a stick and hooked it up to the sick computer. After a while, Good Ol’ Puppy Linux boots into the computer’s RAM.

An icon for the Windows partition on the hard drive popped up on the desktop. After a few clicks, I found the important files and saved them to another USB stick for safekeeping.

Puppy Linux setup setup tool GUI

FossaPup’s separate setup tools offer a number of personalization options with a graphical user interface (GUI).

a new linux believer

My now enthusiastic neighbor was amazed that he could stick to completing the project using my Fossapup OS on his “broken” computer. He could still work on PNG images, Microsoft Word documents, and Excel spreadsheets that I retrieved from my hard drive.

Puppy Linux Apps let it get the job done. Before this machine encounter, my neighbor didn’t know what Linux was. Using the built-in Puppy remastering tool, I cloned a copy for that. A few days later, I used another Linux boot repair tool to fix the corrupted files on his Windows computer.

Yes, you guessed it. My neighbor is still using FossaPup Linux and is “transitioning” from Windows.

Why use FossaPup on a stick?

Puppy Linux isn’t the only Linux-on-a-stick distro out there. Some distro developers now let you install the ISO file on a USB drive instead of a DVD to view the live session and start the installation.

Some distros have a complicated way of creating persistent memory partitions to save data. PhosApp goes further. It lets you save a particular module on a USB drive and even save multiple system setups.

FossaPup Linux is different because its persistent memory feature is better integrated and works more reliably. You can use this Puppy Linux version as a more than “live” session environment.

fosapp spread

Puppy’s code-building system maintains compatibility with the classic Puppy PET packages and Ubuntu repos. The Quickpat interface installs applications and updates the system to a lesser extent.

FossaPup Linux comes with Ubuntu and the in-house-built Puppy Linux applications.

FosaPup Linux comes with a mix of Ubuntu and in-house-built Puppy Linux applications.

Puppy distros lack user logins. Even if you have another OS installed on the hard drive, all Puppy Linux distros bypass the startup routine installed on the hard drive. But you can encrypt important content files with password access.

The advantage – even if you have to “pocket protect” the USB drive – is the ability to bring your personal desktop and apps to any computer you encounter. When you exit Puppy Linux, the OS and all your files go back to your pocket, closed desk drawer, or wherever.

ground level

FossaPup is worth a try. It’s a fun way to learn about Linux. Plus, it offers an interesting alternative to the traditional Linux OS.

The Puppy Linux line has several in-house applications such as Pburn, PuppyFone, Find’n’Run, Take a Gif, UExtract, Packit, dunst-config, pycom-gtk, Transtray, and Junkie Bluetooth. Puppy Package Manager (PPM) provides a mix of Puppy-specific .pet files and Ubuntu focal-fossa packages.

Besides the USB method, you can install this distro on a hard drive in two ways. Puppy Universal Installer offers to perform a full install that uses an entire hard drive partition. The second is a thrifty install, which installs only several core Puppy files with the 4FS file extension.

With thrifty installations, Puppy automatically saves all changes to the Puppy save file during a computing session and when you shut down the OS. A handy feature lets you set up multiple save files based on your needs, so you can load different Puppy Linux configurations in one place instead of maintaining different Puppy sticks.

suggest a review

Have a Linux software application or distro you’d like to recommend for review? Something you love or want to know?

Email me your thoughts and I’ll consider them for future columns.

And use the reader comments feature below to provide your input!

An interesting thought occurred to me over Thanksgiving vacation thousands of miles from my home in Silicon Valley. While I do most of my work on the 2021 M1-based MacBook Pro, I occasionally need access to a Windows PC for specific applications that aren’t available on macOS.

My recent problem was that my Dell XPS 13 Plus was back in California because I didn’t want to take two laptops with me on vacation. I suspect I am not the only one facing this challenge.

While Apple’s macOS has grown in sophistication and capability over the past decade — especially if you have an iPhone or iPad and enjoy the benefits of an “ecosystem” — many users may need access to Windows-only apps. . Or, more generally, features that may not be available in the macOS versions of these apps. The latter is the category I regularly fall into.

Most companies have adopted both macOS and Windows to give users a choice at the business level, even though Windows is the dominant OS in the corporate space. After all, Windows PCs are generally more affordable than their Mac counterparts. Windows PCs are also somewhat easier to manage and secure from an enterprise fleet perspective, a selling point that appeals strongly to CIOs.

Windows apps may differ from Mac counterparts

Although the number isn’t huge, some Windows apps don’t have equivalent macOS versions. Many of these apps are relatively niche as they are development tools or applications written specifically for Windows. In all likelihood, this is an issue that won’t affect most mainstream users.

Legacy apps like Pinnacle Systems’ Studio, a video editing app that’s been around for more than a decade, don’t have an equivalent macOS version. It is always a good practice to make sure that you are using an app that is available on both macOS and Windows.

Nevertheless, frustrating problems can still occur when an app appears to be available for both macOS and Windows. For example, some feature specifics in Microsoft Office apps: there is no universal inbox support in the Windows version of Outlook and the inability to have an embedded YouTube player in the Windows versions of Word and PowerPoint.

These links will help explain some of the specific feature differences between the Mac and Windows versions of the Office 365 apps: Outlook | power point.

Admittedly, the list of differences in features isn’t huge, but these differences can be annoying, so having access to the Windows version of Outlook can be helpful.

Based on my conversations with Microsoft insiders, the company’s ultimate goal is complete feature parity between the macOS and Windows versions. However, in my view, this may not be the case for long.

All this leads to my contention that the ability to run Windows on a Mac is always a convenient backup plan should you want access to native Windows apps.

Bootcamp Great, With Limitations

Apple realized that situation in 2006 when it released Boot Camp. At the time, macOS had a much smaller market share than it does today, and it did not enjoy the wider app availability of Windows.

Boot Camp provides the ability to create a dual boot, where you can easily use either Windows or macOS, although not at the same time.

For some users, this is an attractive solution. But there are some significant challenges with this approach.

First, you won’t be able to go back and forth between Windows and macOS to share content in real-time. More importantly, Boot Camp only works with Intel-based Macs. This scenario is less appealing because Apple has clearly messaged that its desktops and laptops will run Apple Silicon in the future, starting with the M1 chip.

Therefore, if you recently purchased a Mac with an M1 or M2 processor, the Boot Camp option isn’t available to you.

Parallels offers the best of both worlds

For the past several years, I’ve used Parallels, a popular software utility that allows you to use Windows on a Mac by creating what’s known as a virtual machine. Technically, the Mac shares the computer’s resources with the Parallels virtual machine(s) and allows the Mac to operate as a standalone device.

There are many advantages to this approach. Right from the start, Parallels has allowed you to run multiple operating systems, not just Windows. You can also use various iterations of Linux, although this may be too “advanced dance lessons” for most mainstream users who need occasional access to Windows.

The other advantage I find enjoyable is that Parallels removes the need to boot into Windows or macOS. Parallels has a cool feature called “Coherence mode”, which allows you to run Windows programs in a macOS environment.

However, for usability reasons, you may just want to run Windows in a separate window (no pun intended). You can also easily copy, cut, and paste content such as files, images, videos, etc. between the two operating systems.

Parallels on a Mac computer running Windows 11

The Mac notebook is using Parallels to run the Windows 11 operating system in a dedicated window in macOS. (Image credit: Parallels International)

Parallels is not the only software utility on the market that can do this trick. VMware offers a comparable utility called Fusion. But Parallels’ advantage over Fusion is that it works on both Intel and Apple M-based Mac devices.

analyst view

I believe the ability to run Windows on a Mac is one of the most unheralded stories in the PC space and deserves more attention.

As I’ve written before, this feature attribute “How did I live without this ability?” comes under the category of I do not consider this an exaggeration, as many consumers cannot afford a Mac and a Windows PC. Often, it is an either/or situation dictated by affordability considerations.

While I don’t use Parallels every day, the convenience of accessing Windows apps without the need for a separate PC has been a game-changer for me.

What is also surprising to me is that Windows runs smoothly on the Mac. While the major PC OEMs (primarily HP, Dell, and Lenovo) have made great strides in improving the overall user experience with driver and firmware updates, I’ve had my fair share of upgrade challenges when updating Windows.

Because Parallels runs as a virtual machine on your PC, Windows runs more smoothly without the “hiccups” that driver updates will sometimes cause.

some exceptions

Still, running Windows on a Mac using Parallels isn’t for everyone. This approach won’t cut it if you’re a hardcore gamer, as most popular PC games require discrete graphics and multi-core processors from Intel or AMD, which the virtual machine approach isn’t optimized to address.

I also wouldn’t recommend Parallels to Windows users who are video content professionals, as Windows apps running under Parallels will disappoint from a performance perspective.

Also, keep in mind that if you have an Apple Silicon-based Mac, it will only run the Arm-based version of Windows, which has limitations. Drivers for hardware, games, and apps will only work if they’re designed for the ARM version of Windows. From a practical point of view, 64-bit (x64) apps will not work. You have to be careful and check whether a specific Windows app requires 64-bit support.

Nevertheless, there are a significant number of mainstream users with basic Windows productivity application needs who may be easily satisfied with the capabilities that Parallels provides for Mac users.

Interestingly, overall PC growth has been flat over the past few quarters following a pandemic-related market surge in 2020, 2021 and early 2022, but Apple has paid significantly more for its computers versus comparably configured PCs. It has continued to increase its share irrespective of the prices.

Apple’s Ecosystem Advantage

The tight integration between the iPhone, iPad, and Mac continues to resonate with many users. A great example of the strength of this ecosystem is the exclusive native text/SMS messaging service on the Mac, which is not available on the Windows platform.

If you’re an Android smartphone user, the advantage of the Apple ecosystem is gone as many apps allow you to access Android text/SMS messages on your Mac.

Mac users know what I mean when they consider the convenience of using a keyboard on a computer to send iMessage or SMS. Apple, in my view, is unlikely to ever deliver a “key to the kingdom” for that specific feature.

Equal Productivity Allowances

Putting the ecosystem element aside, more Mac users should consider using Parallels to expand their overall productivity if they need regular access to Windows.

At $99 for Parallels’ standard edition, it’s a cheap way to avoid buying a dedicated Windows PC — and that scenario may ultimately be what scares the dickens out of big PC makers.

Will using Parallels eliminate the need to buy an independent Windows laptop? Because of the caveats above, the answer is not clear. If you’re a “power” Windows user, you may need a lot more performance than the virtual Windows experience can provide.

However, the reality is that there are a non-trivial number of Mac users with occasional access to Windows for productivity applications who could benefit from a virtual operating system experience to avoid the hassle and expense of owning a separate Windows PC. Huh.

A massive phishing campaign built on typoquoting is targeting Windows and Android users with malware, according to a dangerous intelligence firm and cybersecurity website.

More than 200 typoquoting domains are currently used in an ongoing campaign that impersonates 27 brands to trick Web surfers into downloading malicious software to their computers and phones, BleepingComputer reported Sunday.

Threat intelligence firm Cyble revealed the campaign in a blog last week. It reported that phishing websites trick visitors into impersonating Google Wallet, PayPal and Snapchat to download fake Android applications that contain the ERMAC banking trojan.

BleepingComputer explained that while Cyble focused the campaign’s Android malware, a much larger operation aimed at Windows is being deployed by similar threat actors. That campaign features more than 90 websites designed to advance malware and steal cryptocurrency recovery keys.

Typosquatting is an age-old technique of redirecting cyberspace travelers to malicious websites. In this campaign, BleepingComputer explained, the domains used are too close to the original, with a letter swapped out of the domain or an “s” added to it.

It added that the phishing sites also appear to be authentic. They are either clones of real sites or enough to fool a casual visitor.

Typically, victims end up on sites by making typos in the URLs entered in the browser’s address bar, this continues, but URLs are sometimes entered in emails, SMS messages, and on social media as well.

“Typosquatting is not novel,” said Sherrod DeGripo, vice president for threat research and detection at Proofpoint, an enterprise security company in Sunnyvale, Calif.

“Goggle.com was accidentally sending visitors to a malicious site with drive-by malware downloads as early as 2006,” DeGrippo told TechNewsWorld.

abnormal scale

Although the campaign uses tried-and-tested phishing techniques, it does have some distinctive features; Security experts told TechNewsWorld.

“The size of this campaign is unusual, even though the technology is old-school,” said Mike Parkin, senior technical engineer at Vulcan Cyber, a provider of SaaS for enterprise cyber risk prevention in Tel Aviv, Israel.

“This particular operation appears to be on a larger scale than typical typosquatting efforts,” said Jarrod Picker, a competitive intelligence analyst at Deep Instinct, a deep-learning cybersecurity company in New York City.

The focus on mobile apps is another departure from the norm, said Grayson Milborn, director of security intelligence at OpenText Security Solutions, a global threat detection and response company.

“Targeting mobile apps and related websites with the goal of distributing malicious Android apps is something that is not new, but not as common as typosquatting that targets Windows software websites,” he said.

What’s interesting about the campaign is its reliance on both typing mistakes made by users and the deliberate delivery of malicious URLs to the target, observed Hank Schles, senior manager of security solutions at Lookout, a San Francisco-based provider of mobile phishing solutions.

“It appears with a broad campaign [a] There is a high chance of success if an individual or organization does not have proper security,” he said.

Why does typosquatting work?

Phishing campaigns that exploit typoquoting don’t need to be innovative to be successful, maintained Roger Grimes, a defense campaigner at KnowBe4, a security awareness training provider in Clearwater, Fla.

“All typosquatting campaigns are quite effective without the need for advanced or new tricks,” he told TechNewsWorld. “And there are many advanced tricks, such as homoglyphic attacks, that add another layer that can fool even experts.”

Homoglyphs are letters that are similar to each other, such as the letters O and zero (0), or the uppercase I and lowercase letter l (EL), that look similar in a sans-serif font, such as Calibri.

“But you don’t find a ton of these more advanced attacks out there because they don’t need them to be successful,” Grimes continued. “Why work hard when you can work easily?”

Abhay Bhargava, CEO of AppSecEngineer, a security training provider in Singapore, said typosquatting works because of trust.

Bhargava told TechNewsWorld, “People have become so used to seeing and reading well-known names that they think a site, app or software package has almost the same name and the same logo as the original product. “

“People don’t stop to think about minor spelling discrepancies or domain discrepancies that differentiate the original product from the fake,” he said.

Some domain registrars guilty

Picker explained that it’s all too easy to “fat finger” when typing a URL, so PayPal becomes PalPay.

“It will get loads of hits,” he said, “especially since typosquatting attacks typically present a web page that is essentially a clone of the original.”

“Attackers also snatch away multiple similar domains to ensure that many different typos will match,” he said.

Grimes stressed that even the current domain registration system doesn’t help matters.

“The problem is made worse because some services allow bad websites to obtain TLS/HTTPS domain certificates, which many users believe is safe and secure,” he explained. “More than 80% of malware websites have digital certificates. It makes fun of the entire public key infrastructure system.”

“On top of that,” Grimes continued, “the Internet domain naming system is broken, apparently allowing rogue Internet domain registrars to obtain rich registration domains that are easy to see, used in some sort of misdirection attack. Profit incentives, which reward registrants for looking the other way, are a big part of the problem.

Mobile browser more responsive

Hardware form factors can also contribute to the problem.

“Typoquoting is far more effective on mobile devices because of how mobile operating systems are built to simplify the user experience and reduce clutter on small screens,” explained Schles.

“Mobile browsers and apps shorten URLs to improve their user experience, so the victim may not see the full URL in the first place, much less typos,” he continued. “People usually don’t preview URLs on mobile, which is something they can do by hovering over a computer.”

Typosquatting is certainly more effective for phishing on mobile phones because URLs aren’t fully visible, agree CISO and co-founders of Tresorit, an email encryption-based security solutions company in Zurich.

“To run Trojans, not so much because people usually use apps or the Play Store,” he told TechNewsWorld.

How to prevent typosquatting

To protect themselves from falling victim to phishing typosquatting, Picker advises users not to follow links in SMS messages or emails from unknown senders.

He also advised caution while typing URLs, especially on mobile devices.

“When in doubt, the user can directly Google the established domain name, rather than simply clicking on the link,” DeGripo said.

In the meantime, Schles suggested that people should rely on their mobile devices a little less.

“We know how to install anti-malware and anti-phishing solutions on our computers, but there is an inherent belief in mobile devices such that we feel it is not necessary to do so on iOS and Android devices,” he said.

“This campaign is one of countless examples of how threat actors leverage that trust against us,” he said, which demonstrates why it’s important to build a security solution specifically for mobile threats on your smartphone and tablet. .