Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

FBI Raids Home of Spam King Alan Ralsky

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on Sun Oct 16, 2005 02:26 PM
from the click-here-to-enlarge-your-prison-cell dept.
wstearns writes "The Detroit News is reporting that the FBI has raided Alan Ralsky's home. In the raid, the FBI took computers and financial records, effectively shutting him down. Mr. Ralsky has been frequently covered here."
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Spammer Alan Ralsky Indicted 206 comments
Several users have written to tell us that notorious spammer Alan Ralsky has been indicted along with ten others on 41 counts of spam-related illegal activity. Ralsky has had trouble with the law in the past, and the current litany of charges includes mail and wire fraud, money laundering, conspiracy, and violation of federal spamming laws. From the Detroit Free Press: "The 41-count indictment said Ralsky ... and others used unsolicited e-mail to pump up the price of largely worthless stock in Chinese companies and sold the stock reaping huge profits and leaving Internet subscribers who purchased it holding the bag. The operation also used illegal methods to maximize the amount of spam that could be sent while evading spam-blocking devices and tricked recipients into opening and acting on advertisements, prosecutors said."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • by dzafez (897002) on Sunday October 16 2005, @02:28PM (#13804845) Homepage
    Will I be notified, if they find out I'm a victim??

    Hell the guy from nigeria didn't write me for a while, I'll send him an E-Mail. I'm still waiting for a large transaction :-)
    • they just took away his stuff, how lame! he committed a crime and should be punished.

      if i was the FBI, i would take those penis enlargment pills and start shoving them up his ass until he begs for mercy.

      poor business ethics are ignored so much in todays society that it's hardly considered news anymore.
      • by Shakrai (717556) on Sunday October 16 2005, @04:28PM (#13805470) Journal

        they just took away his stuff, how lame! he committed a crime and should be punished.

        Ya know, as big of a sleezeball as we might think he is, the FBI doesn't (nor should it) have the authority to punish him for whatever crimes you think he might have committed.

        That role is reserved for juries and judges.

        • by www.sorehands.com (142825) on Sunday October 16 2005, @05:36PM (#13805785) Homepage
          I had a tour of the FBI's cyber crime office in Boston -- they got some neat toys.


          They didn't just take away his stuff. They took away his stuff, to then copy it onto network storage. Then copy the drives onto otpical media. Then copy it onto hard drives. All while leaving the originals unmodified. Then they will analyze the data to gather evidence.

          It would be real sweet to know the domains that they used so that every spam victim can file suit against Ralsky and Bradley. We can take out spammers with distributed lawsuits. A spammer can survive 1,2 or maybe 10 lawsuits, but can they survive 100? I, with help, took out Avtech [barbieslapp.com].

          I tracked down a big time ink spammer [barbieslapp.com], going under the name of payless inks, top quality inks, inks on sale. I posted the strings to search for on my spam page [barbieslapp.com] so that any spam victim can file suit. If you file suit, contact me and I'd be happy to serve the summons and complaint.

        • by secolactico (519805) on Sunday October 16 2005, @03:31PM (#13805190) Journal
          ... Or put him in prison and give those pills to his cellmates.

          The article is a bit thin on details, tho. It's mostly background info on Ralsky. Why was he raided? CAN-SPAM violations? Or was he found suspect of something else (fraud, maybe?)

          "60 year old, gregarious, heavy smoker". Methinks nature will take him out soon enough.
    • by jurt1235 (834677) on Sunday October 16 2005, @03:02PM (#13805044) Homepage
      This is the proposed message:

      DeAR u.ser

      Precvio3sly you have b33n victim of unsol.citated e-mail, so called s.pam selling u v1agra and p.enis enlarg.ements products, us.iNG aNNoying layouts ant teipos to confu..se your s.p.a.m..filters.
      The FBI now offers you the ReA.L links to the places where you can buy your V.1agrA and P.eniSEnlar.gement produCTs for the real pr1ce without the middle S.P.am man.

      Please go to v1agrahfDUgfapitdrGPSRGf.fbi.gov for the fastest S$hop
    • Will I be notified, if they find out I'm a victim??

      The pills didn't work?
  • by thesnarky1 (846799) on Sunday October 16 2005, @02:29PM (#13804850) Homepage
    I am heir to the FBI throne which was recently desposed. FOr only $2000 down, you can secure your right to this massive wealth as well.
  • by Datagod (613152) on Sunday October 16 2005, @02:30PM (#13804856)
    Did they get his Spam Crown and Scepter?
  • Oh no! (Score:5, Funny)

    by rock217 (802738) <slashdot.rockshouse@com> on Sunday October 16 2005, @02:31PM (#13804858) Homepage Journal
    NOW who will fill my inbox?!
  • by Seq (653613) <slashdot AT chrisirwin DOT ca> on Sunday October 16 2005, @02:31PM (#13804863)
    I had thought my Inbox was rather empty today...
    • Tell me about it -- I knew something was up when I only had 367 unread messages in my 'Spam' folder. I thought maybe the internet was down last night or something.
  • ...unless they shot him.
  • Seriously -- whether you like Ralsky or not, this practice of seizing computer equipment is probably unconstitutional. He is being deprived of his property and his ability to make a living, without due process of law. According to TFA, all of his computer were seized, shutting him down.

      We may object to Ralsky's nefarious tactics, but the point is that SourceForge could in principle be next.

    • by ivan256 (17499) * on Sunday October 16 2005, @02:36PM (#13804898)
      If you know this happened, you can be sure they had a warrant. That means there was due process.
      • by ElMiguel (117685) on Sunday October 16 2005, @03:01PM (#13805042)

        From the Wikipedia article on due process [wikipedia.org]:

        Procedural due process is essentially based on the concept of procedural fairness. As a bare minimum, it includes an individual's right to be adequately notified of charges or proceedings involving him, and the opportunity to be heard at these proceedings.

        Was he notified before the raid? Did he get a chance to be heard and to oppose the raid before it happened? I know he will have an opportunity to do so in the trial (if there is one), but the point is that even now his livelihood has already been destroyed.

        I know it's hard to sympathise with Ralsky, but this could also happen to many other people if they are sued by the RIAA or MPAA, using exactly the same legal principle.

        • by SScorpio (595836) on Sunday October 16 2005, @03:37PM (#13805223)
          Dear Drug Lord,

          The FBI will be performing a raid on your crack house at 123 N. Main, on October 27th at 11:45pm. We better not finding anything illegal there.

          Your friendly Federal Bureal of Investigation

          I'm sorry but are you a fucking retard? The point of a raid is to go in and find indisputalable evidence that the crime was committed. A warrent will show that there is some evidence to it happening, but the raid will produce the evidence that will make the trail happen and get the assholes into jail. Or are you just afraid the FBI will raid your house and steal your computer to arrest you for all your downloaded p0rn, and MP3s.

            • by LurkerXXX (667952) on Sunday October 16 2005, @03:49PM (#13805282)
              For crack they have a convienient little test kit. Toss in a bit of the sample. If it turns blue, it's crack. Arrest the guy.

              If the kits didn't exist, they would have to send the sample to the lab to have it analyzed. That's what they are doing with the hard drives since there is no step 1,2,3 test kit to prove this crime.

              It comes down to the police having enough good evidence to convience a judge that the crime most likely did happened and that he should write a search warrent. I have no problem at all with that as long as the police and the judge are technically savy enough to analyze the evidence to know what it really means. If they aren't savy enough, that's when you are likely to get the bad warrents and the bad outcomes.

    • by bersl2 (689221) on Sunday October 16 2005, @02:38PM (#13804914) Journal
      Warrants unsealed last week revealed that agents in September seized computers, laptops, financial records and disks from the 8,000-square-foot home of Alan M. Ralsky.

      Apparently, he is getting due process.
    • I'm going to disagree that it is unconstitutional. The equipment is 'evidence', and warrants were issued for its confiscation. When his trial is over, he will get his equipment back (although the hard drives might be wiped clean, should he be found guilty).

      And although Mr. Ralsky says he is effectively out of business, I trust him and this statement as much as I trust his honorable treatment of email address removal requests - which is no trust at all*. He certainly has backup tapes off site. He also has the means to start right back up - or he should have, considering the money involved. If he doesn't, then he is an idiot, and gets what he deserves. SBC wouldn't go out of business if their bookkeeping computers were seized - same principle here.

      I know I expect SourceForge to have backup tapes held off site. If SourceForge and OSDN don't have disaster recovery plans already written and tested - shame on them.

      Every business that depends on IT should have a DR plan. Even if law enforcement mistakenly seizes your computers - that doesn't excuse your business from failing. Once you get 'large enough' it is irresponsible to not have a DR plan.


      *According to the Spamhaus Project [spamhaus.org], Mr. Ralsky hosts his email servers in China to evade U.S. law. [spamhaus.org] And as an email administrator, I don't see any evidence that email removal requests result in less spam - quite the opposite, really.

      • Hmm.... I tried to make this comment earlier but was unable to post for a while, so here's take 3:

        The point is that FBI seizure of computers for evidence is extremely disruptive, and (since the computers are generally kept for at least a full obsolescence cycle and often damaged) amounts to taking stuff and not giving it back. We've all heard stories about people and organizations who lose lots of stuff for no good reason. The most famous recent one was Indymedia but there are others. That sort of thing is not supposed to happen.
  • by Zerbey (15536) * on Sunday October 16 2005, @02:32PM (#13804878) Homepage Journal
    "Effectively" shut down? So he's free to just buy new servers, host them elsewhere and restart his spamming or have they slapped an injunction off him telling him to stop?
  • Porn? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Seumas (6865) on Sunday October 16 2005, @02:33PM (#13804879)
    He must have been spamming something obscene, because the FBI doesn't have the resources to deal with spammers while they're on this moral crusade to re-puritanize this god fearing country.

    Besides, spamming is okay as long as you're a big corporation that either does or may contribute or lobby congress at some point.

    Spamming is only bad if you're a private citizen doing it, sort of like how raping teenage babysitters, doing coke, driving drunk and killing women when you drive off a bridge and wander away is only bad for private citizens.
  • I mean, I'm sure he opted out of FBI raids on questionable business practices....
  • by azav (469988) on Sunday October 16 2005, @02:38PM (#13804910) Homepage Journal
    I just phoned the Detroit office of the FBI who raided Ralsky's home at (313) 965-2323 and told the responding agent that I was so unbelievably happy that their office raided Alan Ralsky.

    The agent was amazed and replied "uh thank you. We don't get calls like this very often."

    OMG. Wow.

    This is an excellent opportunity to show your support that we STRONGLY support their action and efforts!

    If they know their is huge public support for this, that may help them to shut down more of these spammers!

    This is AWESOME!

    Just call and say thanks and this will keep things moving in the right direction.

    w00t!
    • "Just call and say thanks and this will keep things moving in the right direction."

      Why do you want to spam FBI with useless phone calls? I agree that people have to express what they thing, but this is ridiculous, just imagine the poor guys over there responding to the avalanche of phone calls...
    • by hackstraw (262471) * on Sunday October 16 2005, @03:20PM (#13805141) Homepage
      Just call and say thanks and this will keep things moving in the right direction.

      Hold your horses. Why was he "raided"? What law did he break? Did you break the same law last week?

      I hate spammers with a passion, but I like my freedom a little more than they are irritating to me.
      • by schon (31600) on Sunday October 16 2005, @03:05PM (#13805066) Homepage
        I hardly get any spam at all. I use spamassassin on my server and junkmatcher on my client.

        If you hardly get any spam at all, then why do you need *TWO* spam filters?

        You *GET* lots of spam - just because you don't see it, doesn't mean it's not there.
          • by vsprintf (579676) on Sunday October 16 2005, @03:59PM (#13805332)

            No, I don't get lots of spam. Most of it is denied at the SMTP protocol level and is never even written to disk. Most of the rest is filtered out based on content and /dev/null'd before it reaches the mailbox delivery step. The client side filter is then left to handle the very small quantity of mail that is difficult to discern with more general measures and makes it past the SMTP and MDA level and is of course then downloaded by the useragent for fine-tuning of the local filter.

            Okay, I've seen responses like this in the past, and I'll admit that I have little knowledge of how the whole thing works (because I'm not really interested as long as it works). However, whether those messages are being dumped into my throw-away hotmail account's junk folder or being transported *somewhere*, they are being written to disk somewhere. They are also using up bandwidth during transport, and that bandwidth is not being paid for by the spammers. I don't understand the logic of people who claim spam is not a problem just because they don't see any in their inbox. That seems a bit like claiming that the termites aren't really a problem because your house hasn't fallen down yet.

  • by humankind (704050) on Sunday October 16 2005, @02:50PM (#13804974) Journal
    This is a very good sign.

    The reason spammers operate is because it has been profitable for them due to their operating expenses (apathetic law enforcement, hazy jurisdiction, theft of third-party bandwidth and resources).

    As more of these people get raided and have to deal with serious legal and criminal issues, the "cost" of operating will go up substantially, and as a result, it will not be as profitable for them to operate.

    Let's hope the FBI follows through on this and puts this guy in jail. There's no doubt he committed a ton of crimes, including computer tampering, pornography, identity theft, etc. Spammers routinely break loads of laws in operating their business. Finally, we're seeing some agencies start to enforce these laws.
  • by Dynamoo (527749) * on Sunday October 16 2005, @02:59PM (#13805033) Homepage
    Ralksy isn't the worst of the bunch.. perhaps his BIGGEST mistake is actually having some sort of media profile. There are plenty of spammers out there who are even more despicable than him, but it seems that Ralsky is an easy target. Perhaps they should consider going after Robert Soloway [spamhaus.org] or Alec Defrawy [thedefrawyscams.com] next?
  • by grolaw (670747) on Sunday October 16 2005, @04:15PM (#13805425) Journal
    This will not prove to be much of a bust. If there were anything of substance in the information there would have been a felony arrest rather than merely a search warrant.

    Of course, there are clandestine warrants - entry and installation of a logger followed by entry with a "regular" warrant to collect the data & computers. Perhaps an arrest will follow shortly.

    If all the matter comes down to is a nice little fine....

    This clown will just up his contribution to the Republicans - just making money as a free rider is status quo ante for the Bushies.
  • Alan Ralsky is one of the most egregious and pernicious of the spam scum out there. He tops the ROKSO (Registry of Known Spam Offenders) lists and is responsible for a very large volume of spam originating from APNIC netspace. Much of his spam hosting is overseas and he regularly emits spam by relaying it through zombied systems open relays or proxies. As you will see from the article some of his own state's anti-spam legislation were actually created with him solely in mind.

    I can only hope we see more of this in kind, especially Waggoner, Marin, Scelson, Lin, Martino and ESPECIALLY Soloway who, like Ralsky, has always been quite the unapologetic spammer.

    As an earlier poster said, thank you to the FBI for their hard work, and also for starting to take this problem seriously.

  • First they came for the child pornography wierdos
    and I did not speak out
    because I did not look at child Pornography

    Then they came for the spammers
    and I did not speak out
    because I did not spam

    Then they came for the GNAA
    and I did not speak out
    because I was not a troll

    Then they came for me
    and there was no one left
    to speak out for me
  • condolences (Score:4, Insightful)

    by trelanexiph (605826) on Sunday October 16 2005, @08:57PM (#13806584) Homepage
    should be directed to:

    Alan Murray Ralsky
    6747 Minnow Pond Dr,
    West Bloomfield, MI 48322
    Telephone: 248-926-0688 * Confirmed

    Remember console frequently, and console late at night. Snail Mail gladly accepted. In fact, considering the trash he's sent us, filling his voicemail is entirely appropriate. Read him your spam. Read it slowly.
    • by Coneasfast (690509) on Sunday October 16 2005, @02:35PM (#13804891)
      Last time I checked, it was legal to e-mail someone you don't know.

      if you read the article (not slashdotted yet):

      The law also forbids spammers from using multiple e-mail addresses or domain names to camouflage their identities. Penalties include up to 20 years' imprisonment and an $11,000 fine per offense.

      Warrants show FBI agents sought evidence Ralsky and Bradley sent commercial e-mail using at least 14 domain names.
        • by ilyaaohell (866922) on Sunday October 16 2005, @03:36PM (#13805209)
          Stiff punishments exist as much to be carried out as they do to DETER people from comitting crime. If you know that you can be sent to prison for 20 years for doing something, you'll be less likely to do it. If you know that you'll get probation and community service, or even a couple of months of jail time, you know that the millions you can make on your illegal activities will probably justify this risk.
        • by Sloppy (14984) on Sunday October 16 2005, @03:54PM (#13805310) Homepage Journal
          Spam is awful, but 20 years in prison for it is just absurd.
          Oh, I agree. If I send a spam to someone, I should only have to spend a day in jail. Maybe even just an hour. Half an hour? Oh, whatever. And if I expect this reasonably light sentence for myself committing the mostly harmless (but nevertheless malicious and fraudulent) crime of spamming a fellow human being, then it's only fair for this guy to get a fair sentence likewise.

          So let's only imprison him for one hour..

          ..per victim.

            • by TFGeditor (737839) on Sunday October 16 2005, @05:47PM (#13805838) Homepage
              " How about we imprison him for one half second, the time it takes to hit delete ...per message"

              Are you really that naive? What about the time it takes to sort through hundreds of spam messages to find the legitimate email? What about the time it takes to sort through your spam folder for false positives? What about the money you have to spend for anti-spam software?

              You must not get much email from real people if you think dealing with spam is as simple as "hit delete."

              Jeez!
            • by keraneuology (760918) on Sunday October 16 2005, @05:01PM (#13805623) Journal
              Most of the damage is not done to the user, but to the ISP, backbone providers and hosting providers. For the user it might be an annoyance, but for them it costs money.

              All higher costs incurred by the ISP are passed along to the consumer, ergo all of the damage is done to the user, though indirectly.

    • That's a rather tired cliche, and rather corporate too. It's the little guy's fault, of course, for being human. Not every country in the world is soft on spam and allows torrents of it, unlike the USA and a few others. A equally effective remedy is to put enforcement in place that makes the spammer realize that he has a high risk of being caught and if caught will get the book thrown at him. It's not as if we don't know who a lot of these people are, and in many cases we've known who they are for years. Th
    • by oberondarksoul (723118) on Sunday October 16 2005, @04:10PM (#13805394) Homepage

      Yes. It's only spam. Unless you're a family on 56k having to download several hundred kilobytes, or even megabytes, of e-mail you have no use for, no wish to receive, and no convenient way of stopping since your ISP will only offer to sell you their "premium" e-mail with anti-spam services for some extortionate amount.

      Not everyone knows how to set up their own mail server, blacklists, or whatever. Not everyone can simply up and switch providers every time their current address gets unusably bogged down with spam.

    • by L.Bob.Rife (844620) on Sunday October 16 2005, @04:36PM (#13805512)
      This guy is not harnless, he causes economic damage to the nation. Those are real-world consequences of having to divert resources that could be used to help businesses grow, into fighting spam. Setting up spam filters costs money, having workers delete dozens of junkmails daily costs money, downloading hundreds of gigs of junk costs money. Whether you like it or not, this guy causes real problems.
    • People need to learn not to resond to spam.

      Bad meme! [threatchaos.com] If you treat it as a training issue, you're dodging the responsibility. As has been said upthread, spam is theft. It steals our CPU cycles and our bandwidth. People like you stuffing your head in the sand and ignoring the problem only help the spammers win.

      Obviously, God needs to kill more kittens.

    • by humankind (704050) on Sunday October 16 2005, @05:06PM (#13805647) Journal
      Ignorant, uninformed responses like yours really tick me off.

      As an ISP that has to spend twice as much on bandwidth and resources as I need because of the bandwidth spammers consume, I can certify that it costs me a lot of money.

      Upwards of 70-80% of all mail traffic on the net is spam. Probably at least one third of all Internet traffic may end up being bandwidth and resources these scumbags steal, usually by exploiting armies of compromised, zombied PCs to do their distribution.

      Don't even get me started about the countless hours of tech support, computer downtime and other wasted resources due to innocent (and sometimes naive) computer users who have inadvertently had trojan software/plug-ins or worms invade their machines... This is all the work primarily of spammers.

      It's not a simple case of installing a mail filter. That doesn't do a goddam thing to stop spamming. This is like you turning off your television as a way to stop the war in Iraq. Good luck.
    • by bani (467531) on Sunday October 16 2005, @05:21PM (#13805709)
      No he isn't harmless. He hires virus authors to write programs to infect PCs so he can spam from them. He ddoses networks. He rips people off.

      He might not go round clubbing people and taking their money, but he's still a big time criminal, defrauding people of millions of dollars. He's causing economic harm on massive scales, and the people being hurt are more often than not the elderly.

      He's also an easy target since he publically boasts about what he does, the FBI would be considered neglectful if they didn't take him down.