A device uses a network to connect to services that store or exchange information. Along that route, protecting the equipment, connection and account requires related but different decisions. Security aims to prevent improper access, unauthorised changes and loss of availability. Privacy concerns which data are collected, for what purpose and who may know them. An account with protected access can still publish excessive information. Identifying the asset to preserve and the possible incident clarifies the problem each measure must address.

Prevention reduces opportunities for harm before an incident occurs. Updating, limiting permissions and using unique credentials serve active-protection purposes. Additional authentication, when available, adds another identity check. A second factor combines different categories: entering two passwords still supplies two items of the same kind. Such measures can make improper access harder, but do not by themselves explain how to resume work after losing a file.

Recovery addresses that need through restorable backups and planned procedures. A private folder can also be lost, so controlling access and preserving a recoverable version are complementary decisions. Categories may overlap; understanding function and limitation is more useful than memorising a classification. In class, fictional profiles and files allow these relationships to be studied without requesting real passwords or personal accounts of incidents. The campaign connects each measure to a specific risk and a proportionate check of what it achieves.

Phishing uses impersonation to obtain data, money or a harmful action through deception. Messages may use urgency, prizes or threats. Display names, logos and polished appearance do not prove who sent them. Link text does not guarantee its destination either. Such signs justify pausing and verifying, but none alone determines every message’s truth. Independent checking uses an already known address or the organisation’s usual channel.

The protocol asks what happened. If merely received, do not interact or forward the link for others to try; consult a trusted person. If passwords or codes were provided, seek help recovering the account through its official route and reviewing credentials and sessions with the responsible person. If a file was run, stop using the practice device and notify technical staff. Preserve relevant information to explain the case without spreading it to the group. Deleting the message does not revoke submitted data. Support the person reporting it without blame or ridicule.

Audience means the people able to access a post or file. A profile may distinguish everyone, contacts and a group. Reader permission allows viewing; editor permission allows changing content. Review profiles and folders separately because their settings may be independent. Restricting visibility reduces initial exposure, but an authorised person might copy content. Therefore also choose what information to include even when sharing with few people.

App permissions should match a necessary function. Access to contacts, location or camera is not accepted merely because a request appears. Ask what it serves and whether the function justifies the requested data; denying permission may limit a legitimate function. Distinguish stopping collection from hiding already collected data from others. In the fictional profile, review posts, location, tags, contacts and apps. Record previous situation, adjustment, reason and limitation. Settings must allow the intended audience, including the teacher, to view: blocking all reading also fails the need for proportionate project sharing.

A backup preserves information for recovery after an incident. Its usefulness depends on the content it holds, the version it represents, where it is kept and whether it can be restored. Two files on the same drive may help with an editing mistake, but share the risk of losing the whole device. The destination’s independence is assessed against the chosen incident. Different filenames are insufficient if both files would disappear for the same reason.

Synchronisation serves a different purpose: it maintains changes across locations and can also propagate deletion. Seeing information in two places therefore does not demonstrate that an earlier version is recoverable. A checked version history or recovery procedure establishes which versions remain available. Backup timing also matters: an old version may restore earlier work, but not changes made afterwards. Backup frequency and the retained version help explain which recent work might be lost.

The classroom demonstration makes that distinction observable using a fictional file. A recognisable version is kept in the authorised destination, the working version is modified and the backup is restored into another folder, without deleting other people’s originals. Opening the contents checks the version; finding the expected filename is insufficient. The record connects source, backup, restoration and recent changes that might be missing. With this evidence, the campaign can explain what to copy, where, when and how to check recovery, so another person can carry out and evaluate the procedure.

Attention is limited and platforms compete for it. Recommendations may use usage signals to order content; YouTube, for example, documents history, ratings and other feedback. This selection proves neither truth nor representativeness of everyone. Profiling builds a representation from data and signals rather than a complete description of a person. Virality means rapid, broad spread, which can carry useful information or harm. A concrete wellbeing guideline reduces interruptions or determines when to check notifications.

Ralph Breaks the Internet supports observing recommendations, comments and exposure without treating its settings as literal network architecture. Within the ten sessions, AV01 uses 0.25 for preparation, 2.25 for authorised viewing or a coherent selection, and 1 for comparison and transfer. Description and guided reading provide an alternative without viewing homework. Record three observations, check one claim and write three kit recommendations. For harassment, support without blame, preserve relevant evidence with help and use reporting and blocking without spreading the harm. Seek a trusted person and school support.

An educational campaign helps people recognise a situation and choose an action. A slogan attracts attention but needs instructions. The infographic summarises; the protocol orders decisions; the profile demonstrates settings; recovery shows a file reopening; the wellbeing guideline applies a decision to a task. Each piece has a different function. Define audience and vocabulary and provide textual explanations of diagrams so content does not depend only on arrows, colour or images.

A useful message states what to do, how and whom to approach. Distinguish prevention and response in at least two fictional incidents, such as fraud and harassment. The recipient need not solve everything alone. Record sources supporting guidance and, separately, creators, licences and changes for visual resources. Citation does not authorise reproducing an illustration. Share with a restricted audience and check reading with another pair. Ask what they would do in a new case without initial hints. If they remember the slogan but cannot choose an action, revise an instruction and repeat to evaluate improvement.

The laboratory combines different evidence without confusing it. A profile screenshot demonstrates a setting, not audience understanding of a protocol. A restored file demonstrates a specific recovery, not protection from every loss. The test table states risk studied, expected action, observation and limitation. A combined case may include an open link, submitted code and old backup: separate the problems to choose relevant responses rather than one recommendation for everything.

A01 brings together audience, message plan, protocol, guideline and licensed resources. It also includes already applied fictional-profile settings, a recovery micro-test and verified reader access to the draft. A02 presents the complete kit, two resolved incidents, demonstrations and an understanding improvement. Each partner justifies a preventive measure and response through a source and observation. Practice and film analysis contribute to those two assignments. On sharing, verify files open, intended readers can access them and sources and credits correspond to the materials actually distributed.

Primary sources verify a guideline and its scope. INCIBE explains fraud and coexistence; AEPD and INCIBE connect privacy, accounts and backups. A platform’s documentation describes its own recommendation system rather than every service. Identify authorship, date, context and answered question before transferring an explanation. An old guide’s menu may preserve the principle of limiting audience without retaining identical button names. The simulator studies that decision without personal accounts.

Information sources and illustration licences are separate matters. You can write an original checked explanation and link the reference without copying its design or images. For included resources, review exact permission, creator and changes. Optional videos allow pauses and written support; the kit must also make sense without playback. Adapting for younger students preserves decisions and help routes with clearer vocabulary. Check understanding through a new case without claiming certification. Finish by explaining a justified guideline, a test that changed your proposal and a future review based on observations.