Following BREXIT, Eurid (.EU registry) had
recently updated its Domain names Registration Policy, by modifying the
conditions of attribution of a .EU domain name for the British and Gibraltarians,
according to the plan below:
* From 1st November 2019, EURid will NOT allow
the registration of any new domain name where the registrant’s residence or
establishment country code is either GB or GI, unless the citizenship country
code of the registrant corresponds to an EU27 Member State.
* On 24 October 2019, and following explicit
confirmation by the Commission, EURid will notify by email both GB and GI
registrants and their providers about their forthcoming non-compliance with the
.eu regulatory framework.
During this two-month
period, the domain names concerned remained active and could continue to be
used by their holders.
* As of 1 January 2020, all registrants who did
not demonstrate their eligibility will be deemed ineligible and their domain
names will be WITHDRAWN. A WITHDRAWN domain name no longer functions, as the
domain name is removed from the zone file and can no longer support any active
services (such as websites or email).
Twelve months after
the UK withdrawal, i.e. on 1 November 2020,
all the affected domain names will be REVOKED, and will become AVAILABLE for
general registration. Their release will occur in batches from the time they
become available.
* No transfer to GB /
GI registrants will be possible during the two-month period between 1 November and 1 January,
unless they have a citizen country code from an EU27 member state. The transfer
to a non GB / GI registered will remain possible.
Following the UK’s official leave
from the European Union on January 31, the United Kingdom and the EU will enter
into the so-called “transition period” until December 31, 2020.
During this “transition
period”, residents and citizens of the United Kingdom will continue to be
able to own and register .eu domain names. The plan described above will apply
from the end of the transition period and will soon be updated accordingly.
Nameshield will keep
you informed as soon as Eurid will update the rules.
For its part, the British register (NOMINET)
has no plans currently to restrict .uk domain names – they can be registered
irrespective of nationality or place of residence. All are eligible.
During the 12th edition of the International Cybersecurity Forum (FIC), the major event in terms of cybersecurity and digital confidence, which currently takes place from January 28 to 30 in Lille, Nameshield was given once again the France Cybersecurity Label for its DNS Premium solution.
8th Edition of the France Cybersecurity Labels ceremony, January 29, 2020
Nameshield’s DNS Premium labelled France Cybersecurity
The DNS
is at the heart of companies’ critical services: Internet, email,
applications…
Exposed more and more frequently to attacks,
like DDoS, Man in the Middle… it must remain available.
The Nameshield’s DNS Premium is the
solution which meets DNS protection needs with a redundant, ultra-secure
infrastructure with all the key DNS services (anycast, DDoS protection, DNSSEC,
statistics…).
The DNS Premium solution labelled France
Cybersecurity, thus allows its users to protect their digital assets
from any attack and ensures a high availability of their Internet services.
France Cybersecurity Label, the guarantee of a certain level of quality in terms of cybersecurity
For reminder, the France Cybersecurity label is the guarantee for users that the Nameshield’s products and services are French and possess clear and well defined functionalities, with a certain level of quality in terms of cybersecurity, verified by an independent jury.
It answers to several needs and objectives:
Raise
awareness among users and international ordering parties regarding the
importance of the French origin of a Cybersecurity offer and its intrinsic
qualities ;
Certify
to users and ordering parties the quality and functionalities of labelled products
and services ;
Promote
French cybersecurity solutions and increase their international visibility ;
Certify
to users and ordering parties the quality and functionalities of labelled
products and services ;
Increase
their overall use and the users’ security level.
This label is governed by a committee composed
of representatives gathered in 3 colleges:
College
of officials: representatives from the “Direction
Générale de l’Armement” (DGA, the French Government Defense procurement and
technology agency), the “Direction Générale
des Entreprises” (DGE, the French Directorate General for Enterprise within
the Ministry of Economy, Industry and Digital), and the “Agence Nationale de la Sécurité des Systèmes d’Information” (ANSSI,
the French National Cybersecurity Agency).
College
of industrials: representatives from the “Alliance
pour la Confiance Numérique” (ACN – Alliance for digital confidence) and
HEXATRUST.
College
of users: representatives from groups of users, such as: CIGREF, GITSIS, CESIN,
CLUSIF ISSM space.
Nameshield, a 100% French company, certified ISO 27001 on all its registrar activity, was able to bring all the necessary guarantees to obtain the France Cybersecurity Label for its offer, the DNS Premium and illustrates its engagement to always provide the best services and standards regarding cybersecurity.
For more information on our labelled solution DNS Premium, please visit Nameshield’s website.
On June 1970, one year after the Stonewall
Riots, which marked the birth of the LGBTQ rights movements, the first Gay
Pride parades took place in many US cities to claim liberty, equality and
denounce prejudice, persecution, bigotry and hate.
Fifty years later, with the launch of the new extension .GAY by the registry TOP LEVEL DESIGN, a new digital space is created for the LGBTQ community. This extension is thus intended for individuals, organizations, businesses supporting the LGBTQ community. It will increase their visibility and create a safe online space.
The launch of .GAY will follow the calendar below.
.GAY Launching Calendar
Sunrise
period: from 10/02/2020 to 06/05/2020
EAP
(Early Access Period): from 11/05/2020 to 18/05/2020
General
availability: from 20/05/2020
.GAY donations to LGBTQ nonprofit organizations
Note that for each new domain name registered, the .GAY donates 20% of registration revenue to LGBTQ nonprofit organizations like GLAAD and CenterLink which are currently the inaugural beneficiaries.
A .GAY domain name registration will become a way to express support to the LGBTQ community.
.GAY rights protections policy
The .GAY will give the possibility to create a safer space online for LGBTQ community. Indeed, the extension will be subject to a .GAY rights protections policy, which will allow to report any content that is harmful or harassing LGBTQ people, and to act against them by removing the content or suspending the site itself.
“The use
of .gay for anti-LGBTQ content or to malign or harm LGBTQ individuals or groups
is strictly prohibited and can result in immediate server-hold. Prohibited
behavior includes harassment, threats, and hate speech” highlights the
registry.
.GAY domain name registrations will be prohibited to parties that are, or are associated with, recognized hate groups inciting violence against the LGBTQ community.
For more information on the conditions for registration of your .GAY, don’t hesitate to contact a Nameshield’s consultant.
In November 2019, a press release announced that .ORG registry, Public Interest Registry (PIR), a non-profit organization managed by Internet Society, is going to be sold off to Ethos Capital, a private equity firm.
.ORG is the extension for non-profit organizations. The acquisition of PIR by Ethos has quickly concerned the organizations using .ORG, on the basis of the potential misuse of the extension by its new owner, which has, by its very nature, profit motives.
The concern? That the registrations and
renewals fees for .ORG domain names increase.
Yet, key figures of the Internet’s world, like
Andrew Sullivan (Internet Society CEO) are exited, seeing in this a strong
strategic partnership and a significant financial contribution allowing
Internet Society to advance its mission of a “more open, accessible and secure Internet for everyone”, as he
wrote in the press release about the acquisition of November 13, 2019.
It would seem that the fears created find their
origin in the “surprise” and lack of transparency around the deal, since the
transaction amount has not been disclosed.
These fears are, of course, the corollary of the removal on June 30, 2019, of the price caps imposed until now to .ORG fees (historically low) by ICANN, despite many reservations expressed by the community. Finally, the fact that Ethos has directly or indirectly a number of close connections to former ICANN members raises concerns to several voices of the industry.
The fear to see the increase of .ORG prices led Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) to launch the SaveDotOrg campaign, which aims to raise awareness about the potential impact of a .ORG price increase on the NGO’s budget constraints.
Also the possibility that Ethos Capital later
implements a principle of rights protections that could lead to a form of censorship,
as currently practiced in some countries wishing to silence NGOs.
In front of these protests, ICANN suspended the
acquisition operation last December and requests clarification from the
Internet Society.
More recently, in January 2020, a new candidate of the .ORG extension acquisition has appeared. It is a cooperative corporation (Cooperative Corporation of .ORG Registrants), gathering some web pioneer and former members of ICANN.
Browsers and Certification Authorities, the battle continues.
Image source : TheDigitalArtist via Pixabay
2019 was a busy year, with growing differences of opinion between browsers makers and Certification Authorities, an explosion in the number of phishing sites encrypted in HTTPS and significant progress on the depreciation of TLS v1.0.
Discussions on extended validation, more generally the visual display of certificates in browsers, and the reduction of the duration of certificates have taken a prominent place. None of these discussions are over, no consensus seems to be emerging, 2020 is looking like a busy year. Time to look ahead…
Will the fate of Extended Validation be determined?
2019 saw the main browsers stop displaying the famous green address bar with the padlock and the name of the company, in favor of a classic and unique display, no longer taking into account the authentication level of the certificates:
However, discussions are still ongoing at the CA/B forum level, as well as within the CA Security Council. Both of these certificates regulatory bodies will be looking in 2020 for an intuitive way to display identity information of websites.
Historically approved by everyone, including the financial industry and websites with transactions, EV (the acronym for Extended Validation) was Google’s target in 2019. Other browsers, under the influence of Google, between Mozilla financed by Google and Microsoft and Opera based on Chromium open source, have followed in this direction. Only Apple continues to display EV.
For browsers, the question is whether or not TLS is the best way to present the authentication information of websites. It seems that it is not. Google assumes that it is not up to Certification Authorities to decide the legitimate content of a website and wants the use of certificates for encryption purposes only.
Of course, the Certification Authorities see things differently. One can certainly see a purely mercantile reaction, EV certificates are much more expensive. One can also wonder about the purpose of authentication beyond encryption. The answer seems to lie in the staggering statistics of phishing websites encrypted with HTTPS. Browsers have for the moment imposed an encrypted web indeed… but no longer authenticated!
2020 will therefore be the year of proposals from Certification Authorities: providing better authentication, including identification of legal entities, following the path of PSD2 in Europe… One thing is certain, identity has never been so important on the Internet and it is up to all interested parties to find a solution, including browsers to find a way to display strong authentication of websites. To be continued…
Certificates with a shorter duration: towards one-year certificates
825 days, or 27 months, or 2 years, the maximum duration currently allowed for SSL Certificates. However, since 2017 and a first attempt within the CA/B forum, the industry is moving towards a reduction of this duration to 13 months (1 additional month to cover the renewal period).
Google and browsers came back in 2019 with another vote submitted to the CA/B forum, again rejected but by a smaller majority. The market is on the move. Players like Let’sEncrypt propose certificates with a duration of 3 months, others want to keep long durations to avoid overloads of intervention on servers. One thing is certain, the market does not have the automation systems in place yet to make the management and installation of certificates easier, a delay of one or two more years would otherwise be preferable, or at least judicious.
But all this is without counting on Google threatening to act unilaterally if the regulator does not follow… certainly in 2020.
From TLS 1.0 to TLS 1.3: forced advance
Expected in January 2020, Microsoft, Apple, Mozilla, Google and Cloudflare have announced their intention to depreciate support for TLS 1.0 (a protocol created in 1999 to succeed SSL 3.0, which has become highly exposed) and TLS 1.1 (2006), both of which are currently suffering from too much exposure to security flaws.
While TLS 1.2 (2008) is still considered secure today, the market seems to be pushing for TLS 1.3, the most recent version of the standard, finally released in the summer of 2018. TLS 1.3 abandons support for weak algorithms (MD4, RC4, DSA or SHA-224), allows negotiation in fewer steps (faster), and reduces vulnerability to fallback attacks. Simply put, it is the most secure protocol.
A small problem, however, is that many websites are taking action. At the beginning of 2019, only 17% of the Alexa Top 100,000 websites supported TLS 1.3, while just under 23% (22,285) did not even support TLS 1.2 yet. If the decision to depreciate older versions of the protocol is a good one, the form adopted by the major web players can be criticized, in particular by its unilateral nature. In the meantime, get ready, we are heading there.
The threat of quantum computing
Companies are talking more and more about quantum computing, including Google. But the reality is, while quantum will impact our industry, it certainly won’t be in 2020, or for at least a decade. There are still many questions that need to be answered, such as: What is the best algorithm for quantum resistance? No one has that answer, and until there is a consensus in the industry, you are not going to see any quantum solutions in place.
IoT is growing, but the lack of security remains a problem
IoT is a success, but a number of deployments are being delayed due to a lack of security. In 2020, cloud service providers will provide or partner with security companies to provide a secure provisioning and management of devices, as well as an overall secure IoT ecosystem, for their customers.
The regulatory frameworks for IoT manufacturing and deployments will most certainly be led by the EU, although we will also see an increase in the US. Attacks, compromises and IoT hacking will, unfortunately, continue. In addition, security standards will not be met and we will not even come close to a higher percentage of secure devices. Why is that? Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) are still not willing to pay the costs involved or pass them on to consumers for fear of losing sales.
China’s encryption laws will create a lot of uncertainty
In recent years, part of the digital transformation of the world has led to the codification of rights and restrictions on data in national laws and regional organizations. PSD2, GDPR, CCPA, PIPEDA… a real headache for international companies faced with regulatory standards and compliance.
On January 1, 2020, China’s encryption law was due to come into force. An additional data and… still unclear to those doing business in China. Clarification is still needed on several fronts. For example, commercial encryption for international companies must be approved and certified before it can be used in China – but this certification system has not yet been created. Similarly, there is uncertainty about the key escrow and the data that must be made available to the Chinese government. This has led to a wave of speculation, misinformation and, ultimately, overreaction. Given the opacity of parts of the new Regulation, many companies are opting for a wait-and-see approach. This is a wise tactic, assuming your organization does not have an experienced Chinese legal expert.
The .CY registry announces the
registration of first level .cy domain names, i.e.domainname.cy
The owners of second level registered domain
names, can also apply for the same domain names with a first level extension .CY.
Please note that the 2019 Decree does not provide for commitment on any domain names and thus, all requests will be examined on First Come First Served basis.
To submit a request, don’t hesitate to contact our customer support.
With over 5 million mobile applications available today on the major apps stores like Google Play and App Store, over 2 000 new applications uploaded every day and almost 2 billion applications downloaded in France in 2018, mobile apps have rapidly grown over the last 10 years to become an essential element of the digital world.
According to a research done by FEVAD, the revenue from mobile commerce is estimated to 22 billion euros in France in 2018, i.e. ¼ of online sales. Thus, mobile applications represent a fast growing market.
Studies have shown that 68% of consumers identified as loyal to a specific brand have downloaded that brand’s app. Conversely, statistics indicate that 40% of users will go to a competitor after a bad mobile experience. Companies have then quickly come to realize that ensuring that their customers have a high quality and secured mobile experience when downloading and using their branded applications is the key to consumer loyalty.
The growth of fake mobile applications
As brands’ mobile applications have grown in popularity with consumers, the number of fake mobile applications being released into the market by malicious actors has also exploded. Fake mobile apps can be dangerous because they are associated with fraud attacks, and have become a growing threat to consumers. Indeed, they have increased by 191% from 2018 to 2019. The McAfee Mobile Threats report indicates that almost 65 000 new fake apps were detected in December 2018.
Despite the precautions taken by most major apps
platforms to mitigate the number of malicious applications uploaded on their
platform, cybercriminals continue to find ways to bypass these security
measures.
A recent example, the fake Samsung app which
has tricked 10 million Android users. This app named “Updates for Samsung”
promises firmware updates, but in reality is not affiliated to Samsung. Once
downloaded, the app proposes ads first and foremost. To download an update, the
user must pay a fee of $34.99. However, this operation is completely free of
charge since the firmware update is directly accessible from the smartphone’s
settings.
What to do against these fake mobile apps?
Given the importance and omnipresence of mobile
applications, it is absolutely essential for companies to incorporate into
their brand protection and security strategies, a mobile application protection
and a monitoring implementation of mobile apps present on the market.
Every second, a malicious application is active and poses a threat to brands and consumers. To face this, Nameshield proposes an online monitoring of mobile apps present on the applications stores, allowing to identify the ones that might be infringing your brands and assists you in the actions to implement.
The general availability of .MADRID, the geographical extension of Madrid, the capital city of Spain is near. Managed by the Comunidad de Madrid registry, this extension was launched last April following the calendar below:
Launching schedule
APL
period (Approved Launch Program): from 11/04/2019 to 06/06/2019
Sunrise
and LRP (Limited Registration Period) period: from 16/07/2019 to 10/12/2019
General availability: from
17/12/2019
Some requirements must be respected to register a .MADRID domain name. A .MADRID name’s registration is reserved to individuals or legal entities possessing a link with the Madrid Community:
Local
presence;
Professional,
personal, cultural or commercial activity in the Madrid Community;
Direct
or indirect link with the Madrid Community.
The date of the general availability planned for December 17 2019, is approaching, if you wish more information on your .MADRID registration, don’t hesitate to contact your Nameshield’s consultant.
Financial services companies are particularly affected by cyberattacks. They possess a wealth of information on the customers, protect their money and provide essential services which must be available day and night. They are a lucrative target. Among the favored lines of attacks: the DNS.
The Efficient IP’s Global DNS threat annual
report shows a constant growth of the DNS attacks’ number and the financial
impacts, with an average financial loss of 1.2 million euros in 2019. This
amount was estimated at 513 000€ in 2017 and 806 000€ in 2018.
If all the industries are affected by
cyberattacks, 82% of the companies surveyed have been affected and 63% have
suffered a traffic disruption, the financial industry pays a more important
price with 88% of impact. Conducted with 900 persons from nine countries of
North America, Europe and Asia, the study indicates that financial companies
suffered 10 attacks in average during the 12 last months, i.e. an increase of
37% compared to last year.
The increase of the costs is only one of the
DNS attacks’ consequences for the financial services industry. The most common
impacts are the cloud services’ downtime, experienced by 45% of financial
organizations, and internal applications downtime (68%). Furthermore, 47% of
financial companies have been the victims of frauds by phishing attacks aiming
the DNS.
The survey clearly shows the insufficient
security measures implemented for the DNS securing. The delay in applying security
patches is a major problem for the organizations of this industry. In 2018, 72%
of the interviewed companies admitted that a 3 days’ delay was necessary to
implement a security patch in their systems, 3 days during which they are
exposed to attacks.
Only 65% of the financial institutions use or
plan to integrate a trusted DNS architecture, they seem to be always late and not
to be sufficiently aware of the risks associated to this central point of their
infrastructure. The evolution of the threats on the DNS is constant, the attacks
are many and complex. It is essential to quickly react to better protect
yourself.
Industry, trade, media, telecom, health, education, government, service… many others sectors are affected by the attacks. Some solutions exist. ANSSI publishes every year the guide of good practices regarding the DNS resilience, which details many recommendations in order to be protected. Relying on an Anycast network; possessing a protection system against DDoS attacks; having a monitoring of DNS traffic and a team able to take action quickly; possessing an efficient security policy … As many measures essential to the resilience and efficiency of the DNS network against these damaging attacks in terms of financial and image impact.
Hoping to see at last better figures in the
2020 report.
During the first half of November, the 66th ICANN Summit was held in Montreal, Canada. This third and final annual summit devoted to policies applicable to Internet naming was eagerly awaited as the topics under discussion are numerous. At its closing, however, it left many participants a little bit disappointed.
A preview of the topics and postures during the weekend before the official launch of the Summit
The weekend
before the official opening of the Summit is usually an opportunity to get an
overview of the topics and postures involved. Not surprisingly, the expedited
Policy Development Process (ePDP) which aims to develop a consensus rule to
specify future conditions of access to personal data that are no longer
published in the WHOIS, the domain name search directory, due to GDPR, is one
of the major topics.
Among other
related topics, the replacement of the same WHOIS by the RDAP (Registration
Data Access Protocol) probably next year for generic domain names. This
replacement is not insignificant when we know that WHOIS has been in use for
nearly 35 years.
The body
representing governments, the GAC, has weighed up the issue of domain name abuse,
which has taken off considerably on the new generic extensions launched in
2012. When we know the rise of Internet practices aimed at weighing on
elections in certain countries and the economic impact of computer attacks and
hacking, we understand that this subject is being pushed by the GAC. While one
of ICANN’s topics is to clarify in their texts the notion of malicious uses, this
term refers to domains registered for phishing, malware, botnets and spam, the
other part concerns the means to stem them. The existence of abusive domains indeed
threatens the DNS infrastructure, impacts consumer safety and threatens the
critical assets of public and commercial entities. Finally, and not
surprisingly, the subject of a future round of new generic extensions has also
been on many lips.
Cherine Chalaby at the ICANN Summit held in Montreal
“The best ICANN summit”, really?
During the traditional opening ceremony, which brings together all the guests for one hour (2500 according to Goran Marby, ICANN CEO) in a huge room to listen to various speakers, including Martin Aubé of the Quebec Government’s Ministry of Economy and Innovation, Cherine Chalaby, one of the ICANN Board members whose term ends at the end of the year, told his audience that ICANN66 would be the “Best ICANN summit”. It must be said, however, that at the end of the week of debates and meetings, which followed one another at a sustained pace, while the subjects under discussion are really numerous, the feeling regarding this assertion was more than mixed for many participants.
First, the
expeditious process for access to WHOIS non-public data is progressing with a
framework constrained by ICANN and the Personal Data Protection Authorities.
The outcome of this process is envisaged between April and June 2020 and it is
currently a centralized model where ICANN would allow the future lifting of
anonymity of data that are now masked due to GDPR which holds the line.
Then the subject that was probably
most often mentioned during this new summit week concerned abuses with domain
names. For ICANN, the subject is central because it is directly correlated to its
totem: the stability of the Internet for which they are the responsible. Since
February 2019, ICANN has been publishing some metrics on malicious practices
identified through DAAR, their Domain Abuse Activity Reporting.
Their latest report presented in
Montreal shows that 364 extensions (mainly new generic extensions from the 2012
round) revealed at least one threat posed by one of the domain names activated
on these extensions. More worryingly, new generic extensions would still account
for nearly 40% of malicious uses, compared to 60% for historical generic
extensions. This figure should be highlighted with the volume of these two
categories of extensions. Indeed, out of just over 200 million generic names,
new generic domains represent only 15% of the total number of registered names.
ICANN therefore wants this subject to be taken up by the entire community
present in Montreal.
Proposals were made by the various bodies present, some of which went so far as to request a policy development process (PDP). This last proposal, if it were to obtain ICANN’s approval, would have the unfortunate consequence of postponing the hypothetical schedule for a next round of new extensions, a subject that interested many of the guests present in Montreal. Indeed, for ICANN, the problem of the concentration of malicious practices in the new generic extensions must be solved before any future round, so that the PDP still in progress on the review of the last round of 2012 has gone almost unnoticed.
If the rules are slow to evolve on malicious uses, your Nameshield consultant can already provide you with adapted solutions to your needs on this key matter.
Nameshield uses cookies
Nameshield wishes to use cookies to ensure the proper functioning of the site and, with our partners, to measure its audience🍪.
Nameshield wishes to use cookies to ensure the proper performance of the website and, with our partners, to monitor its audience. More information in our Cookie Policy 🍪.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. These cookies ensure basic functionalities and security features of the website, anonymously.
Cookie
Duration
Description
cookielawinfo-checkbox-advertisement
1 year
Set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin, this cookie is used to record the user consent for the cookies in the "Advertisement" category .
cookielawinfo-checkbox-analytics
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-functional
11 months
The cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-others
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other.
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance
11 months
This cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance".
CookieLawInfoConsent
1 year
Records the default button state of the corresponding category & the status of CCPA. It works only in coordination with the primary cookie.
viewed_cookie_policy
11 months
The cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data.
Functional cookies help to perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collect feedbacks, and other third-party features.
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.
Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.
Cookie
Duration
Description
_ga
2 years
The _ga cookie, installed by Google Analytics, calculates visitor, session and campaign data and also keeps track of site usage for the site's analytics report. The cookie stores information anonymously and assigns a randomly generated number to recognize unique visitors.
_gat_gtag_UA_25904574_14
1 minute
Set by Google to distinguish users.
_gid
1 day
Installed by Google Analytics, _gid cookie stores information on how visitors use a website, while also creating an analytics report of the website's performance. Some of the data that are collected include the number of visitors, their source, and the pages they visit anonymously.
Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with relevant ads and marketing campaigns. These cookies track visitors across websites and collect information to provide customized ads.
Cookie
Duration
Description
NID
6 months
NID cookie, set by Google, is used for advertising purposes; to limit the number of times the user sees an ad, to mute unwanted ads, and to measure the effectiveness of ads.
