Fraudulent Financial Reporting Is The Intentional Misstatement Accounting Essay

In the study submitted to the State on Occupational Fraud and Abuse, by the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners ( ACFE ) it was stated that fraudulent coverage which is one of the three classs of fraud ( the other two being plus embezzlement and corruptness ) had jointly estimated to be about $ 1trillion per twelvemonth in the united provinces. And this type of fraud is non merely limited to the United States ( Zack, 2009 ) . Harmonizing to Jackson, 2008, Fraud is by and large defined as an deliberately false representation of a stuff fact made by the party with the pure purpose to misdirect and carry another party to justifiably trust on the representation, to his or her hurt.

Deceitful fiscal coverage is the knowing misstatement or skip of stuff i.e, really important information from the company ‘s fiscal statement. Such types of frauds are besides called as ‘Management Fraud ‘ as it requires active engagement of the direction. Many of these instances include misstated sums and besides unequal or losing revelations.

The above figure shows the per centum of types of fraud that occurs in an organisation. From the above it can be seen that the bulk of fiscal cozenages are because of the fraud committed through gross acknowledgment which constitute 41 % of the pie chart, followed by improper revelation in the fiscal statement which is around 12 % . The least is the investing fraud which is merely 1 % of the entire fraud strategy.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

Harmonizing to Vona, 2008, the legal definition of the fraud explains fraud as:

An knowing misunderstanding of the truth or the suppression of a material fact that persuades another to move on their hurt.

A deceit made recklessly without the belief in its truth to bring on other individual to move.

A civil wrong happening from a cognizing deceit, suppression of stuff fact, or foolhardy deceit made to bring on another to move to their hurt.

Conscienceless covering particularly in contract jurisprudence. The unjust usage of power originating out of the parties ‘ comparative place and ensuing on an conscienceless deal.

Accounting fraud can be explained as an knowing and unacceptable use of accounting inside informations like gross revenues gross and/or disbursals in order to do company ‘s net income appear better than what it really is. The common techniques adopted by many companies in order to pull strings their accounting records are as follows:

Not entering prepaid disbursals or other assets in connexion to it.

No proper categorization of certain current assets and/or current liabilities.

Reducing the short term and long term loans in one amount ( http: // )

Harmonizing to the research made by Ball and Ray, 2009, the intelligence of dirt spreads really widely and excessively rapidly. It has a drastic consequence which includes: a diminution in the world-wide repute of many U.S establishments that includes By and large Accepted Accounting Principles ( GAAP ) , hearers, fiscal markets, regulators and security analyst.

Types of accounting fraud:

An accounting or fiscal offense is a non-violent misconduct which is committed by/or against an person or corporation and frequently consequences in a large fiscal loss therefore when a fiscal institute is involved in such type of offense it is called as fiscal sector offense. Most common type of fiscal offense is revenue enhancement equivocation, peculation of company financess and the sale of fabricated insurance program where as other frauds such as money laundering, recognition card fraud and look into fraud all comes under fiscal sector offense. Most fiscal offenses are lawbreaking which carries rough sentences and such types of offenses are increasing twenty-four hours by twenty-four hours. This can be judged from the informations that in the twelvemonth 1998 alone, more than 300,000 people were convicted for fiscal fraud instance while in the really following twelvemonth, around one tierce of the Americans were involved in some or the other type of fiscal or fiscal sector offense ( http: // )

There are different types of fiscal fraud, but the most basic and of import are three of them which are explained and shown as under:

Frequency of Types of Occupational Fraud and Abuse:

Degree centigrades: UsersgulabjiDesktopfraud.jpg

( Beginning: hypertext transfer protocol: // )

The above figure shows the frequence of the happening of the three major and general frauds. Asset embezzlement tops the chart with highest per centum in all the four old ages both the given twelvemonth 2003,2005,2007 and 2009 followed by accounting fraud or deceitful statement and in conclusion corruptness and graft.

Asset Embezzlement:

Embezzlement of assets involved larceny of company ‘s plus. Largely, 3rd party or employees who work in the organisation abuse their place to steal the assets from the company. This type of fraud is chiefly committed by the manager of the company or its employees or any individual who is entrusted to pull off and look after the assets and involvement of the organisation. They are likely the most frequently happening fraud may be because they are the easiest strategies to understand. This sort of fraud by and large includes things like cheque counterfeit, paysheet fraud, larceny of money, stock list larceny or larceny of services. Data ‘s which are collected late, shows that plus embezzlement occurs in more than 91 % of the fraud strategies. The statistics shows that it is the most common type of fraud but is the least expensive fraud on a pre fraud footing. In an norm, the plus embezzlement costs a company $ 150,000. The above figure shows us the informations of four old ages which states that in plus appropriation is ever high in every twelvemonth. It was highest in the twelvemonth 2007 that is 70 % and lowest in the twelvemonth 2003 which was 60 % which increased to 92.7 % in the twelvemonth 2004.

Bribery and corruptness:

Fraud and corruptness have a distressing consequence on the every subdivision of the society. Public sector graft, fraud and corruptness have started going the affair of concern for legislators around the Earth. Bribery and corruptness is the following most often happening fraud which consists of 30 % of all fraud that is uncovered. Corruptness and Bribery includes things like kickbacks, shell company schemes, payoffs to act upon decision-making, use of contracts, or permutation of inferior goods. It is more dearly-won so plus embezzlement fraud as it costs around $ 538,000 per strategy. The diagram shown above provinces that in the twelvemonth 2003 corruptness offense was about 14 % which than increased to 30 % in the twelvemonth 2007.

Fiscal statement/Accounting fraud:

Harmonizing to the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants ( AICPA, 1997 ) , the fiscal statement is an knowing misstatement or skip in fiscal statement. Whereas, Association of Certified Fraud Examiner ( ACFE ) defines and explains fiscal statement fraud as an intended, deliberate, misstatement and or skip of material fact of accounting figures which are delusory and, when considered with all information made available would do the reader to alter or change his or her judgement or determination ( Rezaee & A ; Riley, 2009:5 )

This is the least common type of fraud, though it occurs less often that is merely 10 % of all fraud instance it is the most expensive for the organisation. The mean fiscal fraud costs around $ 2 million to the company. Such fraud includes use of fiscal statement in order to demo better place of the company which really is non. The diagram shown above provinces that in the twelvemonth 2003 the deceitful fraud were about 510 % which has increased to 38 % in the twelvemonth 2004 ( hypertext transfer protocol: // ) .

Who all are responsible for such frauds?

Harmonizing to Edwin Sutherland, 1949, White Collar Crimes are about those offenses which are committed by respectable and high societal position people in the class of their business. Many of the white neckband offense committed by high profile people in USA like Enron, WorldCom & A ; Adelphia fits in this definition. Zhou and cong, 2001, defines occupational fraud as a portion of white neckband offense that “ refers to an actA whereby the person illicitly uses his or her place for personal benefit ” . They besides stated that graft and corruptness exists at both single every bit good as organisational degree. All large functionaries who are indulging in such offenses believe that the opportunities of acquiring caught are really utmost and this is true because of the undermentioned grounds:

The political power that they have allows them to do maltreatment of their power.

If they caught, they get free by paying punishment or by corrupting the authorities authorization because of the power they hold.

It is even believed by many people that there is a societal privilege attached to holding official societal standing.

Accountants in all the organisations are good trained to do the study and to analysis the fiscal place of the company. The caput of the company or the organisation influences these comptrollers to pull strings the accounting inside informations by composing the false Numberss to do the company ‘s history expression good and the accountant hides the truth for the interest of their employers. Even the when the company hires other outer house to make their histories and audit, the top executives becomes friendly with them and therefore those accounting house compromises their unity to keep good relationship with their major clients. Therefore, majorly the top degree executives of the companies including the CEO, CFO and Auditors are involved in the fiscal fraud which leads to the prostration of the company this decision can be drawn by looking at the instance of Enron, Adelphia, World Com, Satyam etc ( hypertext transfer protocol: // )

Reasons behind addition in fraud in U.S

In today ‘s universe fiscal fraud are increasing both in frequence and in sum. The most of import ground for the happening of fiscal fraud is fiscal force per unit area. By and large when direction fraud occurs, they over states the assets of the company in the balance sheet of the company and increase net income in the income statement. Harmonizing to Albrecht, 2009 direction gets involved in such type of fraud because they by and large have force per unit area to make so, there can be many grounds for making this similar hapless hard currency place of the company, high n umbers of receivables which are non collectables, losingss of clients, disused stock list, diminution in market etc.

Harmonizing to the survey made by Steve, 2001, the top grounds for which such fiscal fraud occurs are as follows:

By and large it was believed that fraud affects largely other organisation and is more serious job in other states instead than U.S but, it was the other manner unit of ammunition. Organizations which deny the menace of fraud are involved in major fraud instances. Those which believe that fraud is the job with other organisation had higher figure of fraud instances filed against them. Harmonizing to the research made, US have the 16th highest fraud rate in the universe. In the twelvemonth 2000, more than 50 % of the big US organisations were indulged in fraud bing company about $ 500,000 on norm. It was estimated by the Association of Certified fraud Examiner that the entire fraud in US could transcend $ 400 billion per twelvemonth in hereafter.

A blind religion and trust on the honestness of the employee may be harmful for the concern so, one demand to do employee feel trusted but yet have control in topographic point to forestall destructing the concern of the company because of one dishonest employee. There is a demand to extinguish one or more of these three elements which make up the fraud ; perceived force per unit area, perceived chance, and rationalisation. These are the three elements which forms the fraud trigon and this peruse an honest employee to make dishonest things.

When there exist trusts that if the fraud will happen in the organisation the employees will raise an dismay if non so the hearers will happen it out. But, it is non ever possible for the employee to inform about the fraud the possible grounds are:

Not certain who to inform about the fraud if top degree direction are themself involved in the fraud.

Some clip they themselves are non certain whether it is really a fraud or non.

They think it may be incorrect to impeach person without cogent evidence.

Sometime organisations itself do n’t let to unwrap.

Trusting merely on the hearer for observing fraud is non so much dependable beginning for the organisation. Because harmonizing to the surveies, hearers merely detect about 19 % of all fraud. So, even employees should be trained to acknowledge the fraud and to describe it. Generally bulk of fraud are uncovered by accidents, opportunity or tips from people.

The following ground for the happening of fraud is the belief that such fraud wo n’t be much to the organisation. But that is non the instance, sing the instance of General Motors ( GM ) , the company which created fraud of $ 436 million in the twelvemonth 1990s ‘ . The company had a net income border of 10 % so, in order to retrieve the loss, the company had to increase its gross by $ 4.36 billion. Therefore, if any company had a net income border of 10 % it has to increase its gross by 10 times of its losingss in order to cover the consequence of the fraud.

Many times there is a unsighted belief that the organisation had a good control system so there is no possibility of happening of fraud. It is non possible because even if there is high degree of control, the fraud can happen in the company that is because the people who build such a strong control system gets involved in the deceitful activities. The people who make the regulation, themselves break the regulation.

Therefore, these are some of the common grounds of why the frauds are increasing twenty-four hours by twenty-four hours. So, directors had to be active adequate to halt such sorts of fraud as preventing fraud costs much less as comparison to observing or look intoing them.

Specifying hearer and their duties to observe fraud.

About Hearer:

Harmonizing to Fernando ( 2009 ) , hearer is the individual who is appointed by the organisation in order to execute audit. Auditor is required to officially province that the histories produced by his client companies have been prepared harmonizing to the normal accounting criterions and show a true and just position of the administration. An hearer is appointed to move on behalf of the stockholders so he is a representative of the stockholder who forms a nexus between authorities bureaus, investors, shareholders and creditors. Normally a company appoint a hired comptroller as an hearer of the company. Peoples who invest in large companies are affected greatly by frauds and cozenages. They suffered great losingss when large giants such as ZZZZ Best, World Com, Enron, Adelphia were in the intelligence because they were involved in the fiscal cozenage. Many investors lost their money every bit good as religion in the direction and Hearers of the company. Once once more such puting populace were shocked in the twelvemonth 2009, when the intelligence of Satyam cozenage hit the imperativeness. In the Satyam cozenage, near about $ 1 billion in hard currency, purportedly the easiest plus to audit was admitted by the CEO to be nonexistent.

Efficiency, liquidness, safety, and hardiness of fiscal market are important to the state ‘s economic prosperity and growing as more than 1000000s of people straight or in straight invest in the capital market. Investors participate in capital market merely when they have in built assurance in the quality, dependability, and transparence of public finance information dispersed to the markets. All fiscal information presented in the fiscal statement prepared by public companies and audited by independent hearers greatly persuades investor ‘s assurance. Auditor ‘s answerability and duties for seeking, observing and describing fiscal statements fraud are having considerable involvement and attending in reconstructing investor ‘s assurance and public involvement ( Rezaee & A ; Riley, 2009 )

Duties of hearer:

It is of import to understand the basic duties of the hearers which they need to carry through while executing audit of the company. When the fraud occurs hearers are blamed for it, we have the incorrect perceptual experience that it is hearer ‘s duty to observe fraud in the company but, in world auditing criterions states that hearer ‘s duty is merely to province whether the fiscal statement gives true and just position of the company or non. He has to execute elaborate probe to do certain that information in the fiscal statement is true and dependable.

Harmonizing to Fernando ( 2009 ) , The Institute of Chartered Accountant of India ( ICAI ) has issued Standard Accounting Practices ( SAP ) and Auditing and Accounting Standards ( AAS ) which focuses on effectual auditing patterns. It describes unity, objectiveness, independency, confidentiality and duty of an hearer. Harmonizing to Standard Auditing Practices ( 2 ) , following are the duties of the hearer.

If proper revelation sing the stuff misstatement upseting the anterior period fiscal statement is non made so it is the duty of the hearer to publish the modified study on the current period financials modified with regard to the corresponding figures included.

Second, hearer has to province in the study that matching figures are non audited if he finds that anterior period fiscal statements are non audited.

He has to do certain that he had proper and sufficient audit grounds that shows that the shutting balances of the old twelvemonth have been right brought frontward to the current period and the gap balances does non incorporate any stuff misstatement which can impact the fiscal statement of the current twelvemonth.

If he finds any material misstatement and feels that this can be the consequence of fraud so he has to measure the deductions of those covering with the organisational place of the individual or the individual involved.

It is the duty of the hearer to inform the direction, those charged with administration and, in some fortunes, when so required by the Torahs and ordinances, to modulate and implement governments besides.

The same reappraisals were given by Apostolou, ( 2008 ) , but he added some points to the duties of the hearers. Harmonizing to him the criterions adopted by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board ( PCAOB ) , Au subdivision 110.02, and states that it is the duty of the hearer to be after and execute the audit in order to obtain hearty confidence that the fiscal statements are free of stuff misstatements whether caused by mistake or fraud.

On 22nd of January 2007, the PCAOB issued a study saying execution of PCAOB criterions that states the Hearers Responsibilities with regard to frauds. AU subdivision 316.52 converse the alteration in the nature, timing, and extent of the audit process. Harmonizing to it following are the duties of the hearers:

It is the duty of the hearer to look into the nature of scrutinizing process and dependability of the fiscal paperss but, the hearers may now utilize computer-assisted audit techniques that may supply him with collateral grounds about important histories. The accommodation was made in the timing of substantial trials for illustration substantial testing should be done for measuring the hazard of material misstatement due to fraud on or near the coverage day of the month. The extent of the processs employed reflects the appraisal of the hazard of material misstatement due to fraud some alterations were made in them likeA for illustration, increasing the sample size, which might be suited for proper rating.

When the hearer comes across the stuff misstatement while executing his audit process, hearer should document the nature and consequence of the misstatement and should analyze whether the misstatement might be inductive of fraud.

AU subdivision 316.08 provinces that direction is in a place to perpetuate fraud as they are in a province to straight or indirectly manipulate accounting statements and records and present deceitful fiscal information. In order to turn to this hazard of overruling of control by direction, AU subdivision 316 requires that hearers should execute certain processs like look intoing journal entries and other accommodations review accounting estimations for possible prejudices which may ensue in stuff misstatement due to fraud. The illustration of it can be the Rite Aid ‘s direction who directed its comptroller to do a false entry in order to cut down cost of goods sold and account collectible in every one-fourth signifier the twelvemonth 1997 to 2000 in order to pull strings their coverage net incomes. This resulted in exaggeration of pre-tax income by $ 100 million.

The little different account about the hearer ‘s duties was given by Bostick, ( 2007 ) harmonizing to him the premier duty of an hearer is to understand the entity and its environment in which he is working.

Understanding the Entity and Its Environment: Statement on Accounting Standard ( SAS ) 109, provinces that it is of import for an hearer to understand its entity and its environment before measuring the hazard of material misstatement so that while executing audit Nes can formalise the linkage between the hazard of material misstatement in an entity ‘s fiscal statement and the overall operating environment of an entity. So the two premier duty of an hearer will be:

Performing certain hazard appraisal process so that he can decently understand its entity and environment including its internal control system.

Assess, with audit squad members, the susceptibleness of the entity ‘s fiscal statements to material misstatement.

Illegal Acts of the Apostless of clients: In the twelvemonth 1988, the AICPA issued SAS 54, in which it provides guidelines on the hearer ‘s duties for observing illegal Acts of the Apostless in the audit of fiscal statement. SAS 54 classifies illegal Acts of the Apostless in two, one with the direct consequence on the fiscal statement and other with indirect consequence on the fiscal statement. Direct consequence is related to the fiscal and accounting facet of the company whereas, indirect is by and large related to the operating facet of the company. It is hearer ‘s duty under SAS 54 to do probe of certain issues sing conformity with Torahs and ordinance, and so he should obtain direction representation refering misdemeanor of Torahs and ordinance and should unwrap it in the fiscal statement.

Laws and Regulations: SAS 99 every bit good as SAS 109 both of them requires an hearer to be to the full informed about the entity ‘s concern and the industry in which it operates. For this, Hearers should:

Initially do an enquiry about the direction and others within the entity, like different employees and the degree of authorization they hold, runing forces non straight involved in the fiscal coverage procedure, those who are involved in originating, entering, or treating complex or unusual dealing, and in-house legal advocate.

He should see all the unusual or unexpected relationship which he comes across while executing analytical process.

To see whether or non one or more fraud hazard factors exists.

To see all other information that may be helpful.

SAS 99 and SAS 109 provide specific enquiries that an hearer is suppose to do to place hazard of material statement. For illustration, hearers should inquire direction and other employees within the company if they have knowledge of any misdemeanor of Torahs and ordinance. The hearer should besides do an enquiry of the internal audit with the internal hearer about their process to place or observe fraud during the twelvemonth. Whether or non direction cooperates with them to supply all the information needed while carry oning audit process.

SAS no 99 besides explains that when an hearer finds grounds that fraud may be in the company, he should convey that affair to the attending of the proper degree of direction. No affair how little the issue is like minor defalcation by the employee at a low degree in the company.

Harmonizing to Barson ( 1977 ) , increasing fraud is non the job of recent times but they do predominate in earlier period besides. So, in order to cut down the increasing figure of fraud, AICPA issued two new scrutinizing criterions covering with corporate abnormalities and illegal Acts of the Apostless. SAS 16 and SAS 17 were the two new criterions issued in January 1977. They were designed to supply counsel on the duty of independent hearer for observing abnormalities and illegal Acts of the Apostless. This was grounds that AICPA was fighting hard in order to repair the hearers function in hard countries. SAS 16 focused on the duty of hearer for sensing of mistakes and abnormalities. Specifically this statement says that, hearer must be after his scrutiny in order to seek for mistake or abnormalities that would make a job for entering entries in fiscal statement. SAS no.16 requires that hearer should presume a high degree of duty in order to observe material disproof and other stuff misstatement which were committed intentionally in order to pull strings the fiscal statement.

SAS no.17 is related to the hearer ‘s function in the sensing of illegal Acts of the Apostless. This new scrutinizing criterion was interpreted by many hearers as ; it gives a moderate duty to the hearer for the find of illegal dealing. SAS 17 includes an scrutiny conducted in conformity with by and large accepted auditing criterions will non guarantee the sensing of illegal Acts of the Apostless. Therefore, it can be said that implementing new SAS was a major measure taken towards contracting the expected spread between the hearer and the fiscal community.

Gun triggers for fiscal probe:

Harmonizing to Hochberg ( 2006 ) , fiscal probe is largely done by a company ‘s board of managers, judicial proceeding commission or the audit commission. When the company declared itself to be belly-up, this probe is done by the creditor ‘s commission or the bankruptcy legal guardian in order to happen the grounds for bankruptcy. There are many triggers that leads to forensic fiscal probes but, all of them falls in one of the below mentioned four classs.

Regular enquiries: When SEC challenges a company ‘s patterns of fiscal revelation and accounting, it calls for an internal auditing probe and it is frequently for a public limited companies. So, when SEC senses that there is some job with the companies accounting process, it stars the probe right off so that the job wo n’t make any injury in the hereafter. This helps to protect the investors as board of managers and audit commission are lawfully required to find whether indicants of incorrect making have kernel or non.

Actions of stockholders: As per the province Torahs, stockholders have full right to bespeak or demand the company to take action against its offices or board members who have been found guilty for deceitful fiscal coverage and ‘self-dealing ‘ minutess. They even have right to inquire the company to right the sum of loss suffered by them because of that officer. In legal footings this type of fraud is known as ‘breach of fiducial responsibility ‘ which is caused by some corporate functionaries. In short, the stockholders attempts to action the corporation or inquire them to take action against the person who failed to transport out his responsibility or who tried to set his ain involvement above the company ‘s involvement. In response to this the company forms a particular judicial proceeding commission ( SCL ) which includes the members from the board who are by and large non an employee of the company and besides who are non involved in any deceitful activities.

Internal audits: Sometime audit section besides raises some issue that may take to fiscal probe. In big companies the internal audit section itself have some resources to carry on forensic accounting probe but in little companies they do n’t hold it. However some serious issues may be investigated by the outside attorneies and comptrollers that because this will non hold any engagement of the direction and therefore the consequence can be trusty. If the company appoints new direction squad or merely a few CFO takes over, and if they find any state of affairs which would make a job for the company in future they may inquire for fiscal probe.

Independent audits: After the cozenage of Enron, the external auditing house have become more cautious to any indicant of fiscal coverage fraud. It is the duty of the hearer to respond spontaneously to the fraud index. In this the hearer garbage to subscribe the audit study unless and until the company has conducted an independent fiscal probe. Such an probe is performed under the counsel of audit commission.

Indexs of fraud:

While executing the audit process the hearers may happen some marks of fraud, which indicates the possibility of fraud in the company. the hearers must be smart plenty to understand these indexs in order to rectify them so that those frauds are rectified before they create any job. Some of the indexs of frauds are explained below:

Some employees in the company handles the activities of the other section for whic they are non responsible this may includes roll uping daily mails, a individual responsible to manage the fiscal contacts of the company deals with the accounting processs etc.

Some employees, who work after hours in the company or merely work in the weekends or insist on taking the work of the company place, are the people who commit fraud. The opportunities of deceitful activities rise when the work of the employees in unseen and unsupervised.

If an employee of the company refuses to accept and follow new accounting guidelines, so the proprietor of the company order all of the employees to purely follow the new guidelines and must look into all the old records of finance and pay axial rotation.

If person trades with all the fiscal operation of the company without direct supervising so the hearer should do a particular probe in that country. As there is high possibility that the individual who entirely is the responsible for records, paysheet, receivables, sedimentations, payments and so on can pull strings the accounting record of the company.



Zack G, 2009, just Value Accounting Fraud: New Risks and Detection Techniques, John Wiley and Sons publication.

Vona L, 2008, Fraud Risk Assessment: Building a Fraud Audit Program, John Wiley and Sons publication.

Jackson, Sawyers & A ; Jenkins, 2008, Managerial Accounting: A Focus on Ethical Decision Making, Cengage Learning Publication.

Rezaee & A ; Riley, 2009, Financial Statement Fraud, 2nd edition, John Wiley and Sons publication.

Fernando A, 2009, Corporate Administration: rules, policies and patterns, Pearson Education publication.


Steve A, 2001, Top 10 Reason Why Fraud Is Increasing in the US, strategic finance, vol 82, issue 11, p58-61.

Ball & A ; Ray, 2009, Market and Political /Regulatory Perspective on the recent Accounting Scandal, diary of accounting research, Vol.47, issue 2. P277-323.

Apostolou, Nicholas, Crumbley, D. Larry, 2008, Auditior ‘s Duties with Respect to fraud, CPA Journal, vol78, issue2, Feb 2008.

Baron C, Douglas J, Gerald S & A ; Smith C, 1977, Uncovering Corporate Irregularities, vol.144 issue 4, pg56-66. Oct 1977.

Hochberg N, 2006, When Accounting Practices Go Under The Microscope, vol22 issue 1, p53-55.

Web sites:

hypertext transfer protocol: //

hypertext transfer protocol: //

hypertext transfer protocol: //

hypertext transfer protocol: //

hypertext transfer protocol: //

hypertext transfer protocol: //

hypertext transfer protocol: //

hypertext transfer protocol: //

hypertext transfer protocol: //

hypertext transfer protocol: //

hypertext transfer protocol: //

hypertext transfer protocol: //

hypertext transfer protocol: //