Vietnam website design / Information security index surges, high risks still exist
The 2013 information security index of Vietnam – VNISA Index 2013 – has been improved significantly, but high risks still exist. Vietnam Net online newspaper reports.
Less than 20 percent of organisations can recognise the hacking and illegal entry and data destruction.
According to Dr Vu Quoc Thanh, Deputy Chair of the Vietnam Information Security Association (VNISA), the 2013 index is 37.5 percent, a considerable increase over the 2012’s index at 26 percent. However, it is far below the other countries in the region, including the Republic of Korea, at 62 percent.
VNISA conducted a survey on 598 institutions and
These are the figures reported by the websites’ administrators when the websites were suspended. The actual number of cases is believed to be much higher.
According to Zone-H, a website specializing in counting the hacked websites all around the globe, in mid November 2013, there were 1,336 warnings for 710 website addresses among the domain names “gov,vn”.
The figures show that the measures applied to ensure the information security for the systems with Internet connection very limited. In other words, state agencies are now in big danger of information security.
The surveys have found that the majority of the attacks to state agencies’ websites aimed to access and make intervention to the systems, while they did not make destructive actions. Hackers left the signals showing their penetration. Most of the state agencies did not know that their websites were illegally accessed, if troubles did not occur.
The website of the Dak Lak Province
Union, for example, was hacked on November 12, 2013, while the home page was still in normal operation. Three Steps to Quality Content Writing for SEO.
Since Google’s Hummingbird landed it would be fair to say that things have taken a very
direction where content writing is concerned. “Semantics” quickly became the new buzz word in SEO circles, but despite Google’s new semantic methodology, things really haven’t changed that much at all. Semantics have been thrown dramatically into the mixing pot, but it’s still all about the quality of the content and the information provided.
It had always been
to achieve a very favourable ranking if you provided measurable quality (as my page one rank for the term ‘web programmer’ had always suggested) and the same applies today. The only difference between the Google of old and the current variant is that with today’s Google it has definitely become something of a pre-requisite.
But how do you provide measurable quality? Allow me to explain my process, albeit in an abbreviated form.
I’ll go back to my own experience using the search phrase “web programmer” as an example. As stated, I had a solid ranking for many years before curiosity got the better of me and I intentionally destroyed it. Why did I rank so highly at the time? I’d like to think it has much to do with my simple three step approach to quality content writing.
1. Understand the Competition
When performing the search for “web programmer” on Google, I spent many long hours researching what my competition was doing. I must have gone through the first 200-300 pages ranked and made a brief note of every subject they covered, also noting what I believed were the positive points and negative points of each article.
They were obviously covering topics that
SEO Keywords Services In Saigon
of some interest and they were obviously doing it correctly since Google was delivering them as results, so I tried to gauge just why Google was ranking them as highly as they were (also looking at their backlink profiles to ensure it wasn’t a false representation).
Keyword/keyphrase research was also important. I’d carefully scan through the documents to ascertain keyword density, and just as importantly I’d hunt variations of keywords or phrases through a combination of both common sense and the Google Tilde method.
Sadly for research of this nature the little known and under-utilised Tilde method is now long gone, but you can still perform similar research by just taking a look at either what Google auto-suggests for you in the search box, or noting the highlighted variations in your search results (below).
For example, if I search for “web programmer”, my Google results are also full of “web developer” records and even “web designer” results of late, emboldened on the results pages.
[SEO service in aVietnam - vietseo]
As you would expect, the research step is vital. The more meaningful information you are able to collect and consolidate, the easier the following two phases become.
If you steal from one author it’s plagiarism, but if you steal from many they call it research.
2. Improvement is the Logical Form of Change
Once you have a good idea of what you’re up against, it’s time for some affirmative action.
By now you’ll be familiar with the bases already covered by your competition through the research phase, so there’s an obvious way to gain an advantage content-wise. You DO IT BETTER.
Expand upon your competition’s articles with your own posts and look carefully through the notes you made in step one, ensuring you are able to improve upon almost every single aspect of the competition’s posts.
Improve upon them with accuracy of facts, improve upon them with quality of writing, and make sure you throw in a healthy dose of semantic phrasing too (especially in page titles and H1 tags), since many of the high ranking articles aren’t consciously using this to rank due to their age.
Don’t forget to cite your sources too. Tangible/quantifiable data ranks very well – if Google is able to follow a link and see the data confirmed by an authority, it adds a little weight to your content.
Another area to look at is which of the articles you have researched can be amalgamated into one definitive article. Again, obvious really, but if you see an article that has the five main reasons you should become a web programmer and another article with five different reasons, your article should give at least ten. Articles