FBI Raids Home of Spam King Alan Ralsky 422
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."
Will I be notified (Score:5, Funny)
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
Re:Will I be notified (Score:3, Funny)
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.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
you don't understand investigations. (Score:5, Informative)
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.
Re:Will I be notified (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
The FBI will e-mail you (Score:5, Funny)
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
Re:The FBI will e-mail you (Score:3, Informative)
That's what Spamassassin [apache.org] is for.
Re:Will I be notified (Score:3, Funny)
The pills didn't work?
Re:Will I be notified (Score:3, Funny)
Unfortunately, no.
His parents still managed to conceive him.
In Other News... (Score:5, Funny)
What about his crown? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:What about his crown? (Score:5, Funny)
Am I allowed to ask who's going to get the Royal Shaft?
Oh no! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Oh no! (Score:2, Funny)
That explains it (Score:5, Funny)
Re:That explains it (Score:3, Funny)
This isn't news for nerds.. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:This isn't news for nerds.. (Score:3, Funny)
Or beat him to death with an enlarged penis.
Re:This isn't news for nerds.. (Score:4, Funny)
Re:This isn't news for nerds.. (Score:2)
whoever rated this flamebait should lighten up.
. . . and now, you're at -1, Flamebait, and he's at +4, Funny.
Too bad... (deprived of property w/o due process) (Score:3, Interesting)
We may object to Ralsky's nefarious tactics, but the point is that SourceForge could in principle be next.
Re:Too bad... (deprived of property w/o due proces (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Too bad... (deprived of property w/o due proces (Score:4, Insightful)
From the Wikipedia article on due process [wikipedia.org]:
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.
Re:Too bad... (deprived of property w/o due proces (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
Re:Too bad... (deprived of property w/o due proces (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
Re:Too bad... (deprived of property w/o due proces (Score:2)
Last I checked, a warrant was generally needed before property could be seized. Last I checked, a warrant equated to due process, at least until the trial ends. How else do you think the police get to keep evidence until
Re:Too bad... (deprived of property w/o due proces (Score:2)
Re:Too bad... (deprived of property w/o due proces (Score:2)
*IF* it comes back functional, it's obsolete by the time you see it again.
They also take the weirdest shit.
A kid running an abandonware bot on IRC had his music CDs, consoles, and books taken as well.
Still, I wish they'd just stick Ralsky in an evidence locker for two years.
Re:Too bad... (deprived of property w/o due proces (Score:4, Informative)
Apparently, he is getting due process.
Also... (Score:2)
Parent is victim of editorial nuking? (Score:2, Flamebait)
And I thought capricious editors were only for the paranoid. Thanks, guys.
Re:Too bad... (deprived of property w/o due proces (Score:2)
If someone makes their living kicking my in the guy parts, forgive my complete lack of sympathy when he gets his steel-toe shoes confiscated. "But without shoes", you say, "how will he make his living?" My answer: who cares? That's his problem, and not one I'm at all interested in.
What gives him the "right" to earn money in this illegal manner, and why shouldn't the FBI be allowed to gather evidence agai
Re:Too bad... (deprived of property w/o due proces (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
Re:Too bad... (deprived of property w/o due proces (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
Re:Too bad... (deprived of property w/o due proces (Score:3, Informative)
There was no mention of it in the article, so it probably wasn't used in Ralsky's case, but....
In the US, law enforcement working for any level of government can seize whatever they want under the RICO Act. They simply have to say "this object was related to selling drugs" and its their's. Doesn't have to be true. Doesn't require a trial. Doesn't even need evidence to support the statement. It is just gone. And good luck getting it back if it isn't related to drugs. http://www.fear.org [fear.org]
I believe it is uncons
Re:Too bad... (deprived of property w/o due proces (Score:2)
Well is he shut down or not? (Score:3, Insightful)
Porn? (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
No, believe it or not (Score:3, Insightful)
Now not all spam is legal, as per CAN-SPAM, some is legal. However most isn't. Most of it is fradulant in nature, or does not have the proper opt-outs and such. Thus, it can be subject to a criminal investigation.
But please, stop the stupid hyperbole. The FBI is plenty capable of
I'm shocked...SHOCKED.... (Score:5, Funny)
He couldn't opt out... (Score:3, Funny)
Call your FBI and say thanks! (Score:5, Interesting)
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!
Re:Call your FBI and say thanks! (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Call your FBI and say thanks! (Score:2)
Re:Call your FBI and say thanks! (Score:3, Interesting)
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...
Re:Call your FBI and say thanks! (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
Re:Call your FBI and say thanks! (Score:2, Flamebait)
Re:Call your FBI and say thanks! (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:Call your FBI and say thanks! (Score:2)
Re:Call your FBI and say thanks! (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:Call your FBI and say thanks! (Score:2)
See, thing is, you admit he's a douche. He may not be the worst, but it's nice to see him arrested for the principle of the matter.
Re:Call your FBI and say thanks! (Score:2)
Re:Call your FBI and say thanks! (Score:2, Interesting)
How much resources do spamassassin and junkmatcher take up? If the answer is anything other than, "Literally 0 percent, and they came pre-installed and pre-configured", you should be happy.
Re:Call your FBI and say thanks! (Score:2)
So, what did it cost you for the extra resources to run those?
One down, thousands more to go. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:One down, thousands more to go. (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, but most spam is sent thru zombie machines. You need to do something much more drastic than arresting spam kings, you need to get rid of their "slaves", too.
Stop the buyers not the spammers. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Stop the buyers not the spammers. (Score:2, Insightful)
I doubt that. Spamhaus estimates that a couple hundred people are responsible for most of the world's spam. If spammers are regularly arrested and sent off to jail, my guess the bottom-feeders doing it will return to embezzlement, pigeon drops, and selling Herbalife. They've just picked spamming becaus
Re:Stop the buyers not the spammers. (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Stop the buyers not the spammers. (Score:2)
Re:Stop the buyers not the spammers. (Score:2)
The parent is pushing an idealistic Perfect Market approach to elimniating spam, but that violates the Sucker Born Every Minute rule.
Re:Stop the buyers not the spammers. (Score:2)
But if you make it financially not worth doing, it will slow down. You arrest them for breaking spam laws, it will slow down.
I will say that yes, people have the right to send emails promoting products, as long as it is not deceptive. Now most spam is deceptive in some way, or multiple ways. The people using spam as an advertising means are just as deceptive and can't be trusted with you credit card.
Th
Re:Stop the buyers not the spammers. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Stop the buyers not the spammers. (Score:2, Insightful)
Cracking down on spammers by the FBI is great. If they do business
Re:Stop the buyers not the spammers. (Score:2)
Yeah, and if nobody ever gave money to con artists, there would be no con artists.
Re:Stop the buyers not the spammers. (Score:3, Insightful)
This is simply not possible.
The cost of spamming is so low that you can send multiple emails to every person on the planet, and if you get even a single response, you've made a profit.
In order to eliminate spam you're going to have to eliminate stupid people. Every single one of them on the entire planet.
Ain't gonna happen.
Re:Stop the buyers not the spammers. (Score:3, Informative)
A Step Forward In the Fight Against Spam (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:A Step Forward In the Fight Against Spam (Score:3, Insightful)
Thank you, judge, jury and executioner.
Hey! I dislike spammers as much as the next guy but blanket statements like this don't help the cause.
Do you understand what spamming is? Do you understand why people spam and how they can profit from it?
Spamming is based on theft. Spamming involves a disproportionate exploitation of resources vs. costs. Spammers steal bandwidth and resources, and most of them steal identity information as well. Pure and simple. What people like Ralsky do i
as a relatively new member of slashdot,... (Score:2, Interesting)
You did WHAT [wikipedia.org]???
i haven't had the time to read the comments so this joke has probably been already said, but:
you've slashdoted him via snail mail
Damn (Score:2)
Ralsky isn't the worst.. (Score:4, Informative)
Anything to do with control of the Internet battle (Score:2, Interesting)
Brazil: "For those that are still wondering what Triple-X means, let's be specific, Mr. Chairman. They are talking about pornography. These are things that go very deep in our values in many of our countries."
Syria: "
They didn't take him into custody (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
This is good news but we need *MORE* enforcement (Score:4, Interesting)
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.
Good news for a change (Score:3, Funny)
-Goran
'Then they came for the spammers' (Score:4, Insightful)
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
Re:'Then they came for the spammers' (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, they came for the criminals. That's because if they don't, the criminals will come for you.
And spam is not a victimless crime. Anyone believing the opposite is more then welcome to send me a cheque for the part of my bandwidth costs that are caused by spam, plus a much, much larger one for the time it wastes.
You are surrounded (Score:3, Funny)
condolences (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
Re:condolences (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Charged with what? (Score:5, Informative)
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.
Re:Charged with what? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Charged with what? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Charged with what? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Charged with what? (Score:2)
Indeed. 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.
Re:Charged with what? (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:Charged with what? (Score:5, Interesting)
So let's only imprison him for one hour..
Re:Charged with what? (Score:4, Insightful)
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!
Re:Charged with what? (Score:3, Insightful)
Meanwhile, I suggest one better. jail him for average transmission time between SMTP server and user, and fine him for bandwidth costs.
Do some math now...
call it 0.01 seconds per message, at about 100kB
I presently pay $10/month for 1G of bandwidth/month at my host, making one spam cost 0.095 cents.
That's 15 years and a fine of $47,500,000 for 50 billion spams.
Seems appropriate...
Re:Good for inbox, Bad for legal system (Score:2)
It isn't. On the other hand, a large proportion of spam comes from only a few offenders... and is no less a problem or resource theft because of it.
Re:Good for inbox, Bad for legal system (Score:2, Informative)
Because it was the FBI, they were enforcing federal law, not a local law that the Michigan lawmakers may have passed.
Re:What federal crime did he commit? (Score:2)
Re:What federal crime did he commit? (Score:2)
If he did not ( spam IS legal if you follow the rules remember ), then its harassment.
Not all are criminals, and while annoying as hell, do follow the laws so they can stay in business.
Re:Waste of tax dollars (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
Re:Waste of tax dollars (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Waste of tax dollars (Score:3, Insightful)
I have a choice whether I buy Microsoft products or not. I do not have a choice whether I receive spam (short of stopping using email altogether).
Re:Waste of tax dollars (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
Re:Waste of tax dollars (Score:4, Informative)
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.
Re:Waste of tax dollars (Score:5, Insightful)
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.