"Manipulation can never be completely ruled out".
Internet research The measures taken would greatly increase the hurdles for future hacker attacks, explains Christine Diemand, project manager of the manipulated Net Audit.
Internet research The measures taken would greatly increase the hurdles for future hacker attacks, explains Christine Diemand, project manager of the manipulated Net-Audit.WW Why are the names of the fraudsters not disclosed? And why are three very different websites affected, all belonging to different operators? Christine Diemand The investigations are currently underway. I cannot give you any names. Nor can I say anything about how the selection of the manipulated sites came about. We don't know ourselves.
Wouldn't publishing the name already be necessary for damage control?
It is still too early to talk about measures. The further procedure is currently being discussed.
How were the manipulations discovered in the first place?
We received a tip from the person who carried out the manipulations. That was the trigger. As a result, we initiated more detailed investigations.
Is there a suspicion that fraud has been committed before?
Manipulation can never be completely ruled out. In principle, however, we assume that the participants in the Net-Audit are willing to cooperate and do not have fraudulent intentions. This also applies to all our other statistics. These are always relationships of trust in which Wemf is also dependent on the participants abiding by the rules.
Net-Audit only launched in February of this year: push the
were manipulations attributed to the study's teething problems?
Actually, no. After all, we are not the only ones who use Net-Audit's system. The agencies concerned, which measure Internet usage in Germany and Austria, work with exactly the same tool. However, no comparable case of fraud has been detected there to date.
It is also astonishing to see how strongly the Net Audit Panel has since the
launch has grown: It started with ten websites. Now, only
Just eight months later, the figure is already 60. Was Controlling overstretched?
No. As the number of participants increased, we had to expand our technical support anyway. That's why we now have considerably more capacity than at the start. At the same time, our know-how has also been strengthened once again. Basically, we are not at all unhappy that the manipulation took place at a time when we are already working on further optimizing the processes.
Wemf also examines web usage with the MA Net and MA Comis studies.
Can you provide assurance that these are free of tampering?
The MA Net and MA Comis studies differ fundamentally from Net-Audit: these two studies do not measure accesses; usage is surveyed. For this reason alone, a site operator cannot exert any influence there. Technical manipulation by persons who are not directly involved in conducting the study, as in the case of the fraud discovered, can also be ruled out here.
Christine Diemand.
Interview: Daniel Schifferle
Wouldn't publishing the name already be necessary for damage control?
It is still too early to talk about measures. The further procedure is currently being discussed.
How were the manipulations discovered in the first place?
We received a tip from the person who carried out the manipulations. That was the trigger. As a result, we initiated more detailed investigations.
Is there a suspicion that fraud has been committed before?
Manipulation can never be completely ruled out. In principle, however, we assume that the participants in the Net-Audit are willing to cooperate and do not have fraudulent intentions. This also applies to all our other statistics. These are always relationships of trust in which Wemf is also dependent on the participants abiding by the rules.
Net-Audit only launched in February of this year: push the
were manipulations attributed to the study's teething problems?
Actually, no. After all, we are not the only ones who use Net-Audit's system. The agencies concerned, which measure Internet usage in Germany and Austria, work with exactly the same tool. However, no comparable case of fraud has been detected there to date.
It is also astonishing to see how strongly the Net Audit Panel has since the
launch has grown: It started with ten websites. Now, only
Just eight months later, the figure is already 60. Was Controlling overstretched?
No. As the number of participants increased, we had to expand our technical support anyway. That's why we now have considerably more capacity than at the start. At the same time, our know-how has also been strengthened once again. Basically, we are not at all unhappy that the manipulation took place at a time when we are already working on further optimizing the processes.
Wemf also examines web usage with the MA Net and MA Comis studies.
Can you provide assurance that these are free of tampering?
The MA Net and MA Comis studies differ fundamentally from Net-Audit: these two studies do not measure accesses; usage is surveyed. For this reason alone, a site operator cannot exert any influence there. Technical manipulation by persons who are not directly involved in conducting the study, as in the case of the fraud discovered, can also be ruled out here.
Christine Diemand.
Interview: Daniel Schifferle
