The Unstoppable 'Tech Support' Scam 312
Barence writes "A pernicious new type of scam is targeting British computer owners, reports PC Pro. The con is both fiendishly clever and ridiculously simple. The fraudster cold-calls the customer and tells them that Microsoft has detected a virus on their PC, then invites them to download a piece of remote-assistance software. No doubt reassured by the lines of indecipherable code flitting across their screen, the caller assures the customer they can make the virus vanish – but first, of course, they want payment. £185 to be precise. The spoof site behind the scam is approved by McAfee's Site Advisor and bears Microsoft logos, something which both companies have failed to act upon. Meanwhile, an assortment of British regulators have said there is nothing they can do to stop it."
Scum (Score:3, Insightful)
God, there are some real scumbags in the world.
Unfortunately, it works. (Score:2, Insightful)
You can only do so much to save the end-user from themselves.
Wow (Score:3, Insightful)
How dumb do you have to be to fall for this one? The kind of people falling for these must be same ones who fall for the "suspicious activity in your bank account" scam.
Nothing to see here, move along.
Duh (Score:5, Insightful)
The only thing you need to stop this unstoppable scam is for people to be unwilling to shell out a significant sum of money to some c**t who calls them up out of the blue.
I mean, £185, when you didn't know there was anything wrong with your computer in the first place? You'd need to have more money than brains to shell out for that.
And ... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Can't Do Much (Score:4, Insightful)
Perhaps they could get the people who have been scammed to report the telephone number and work with the teleco's to find out where the scammers are hiding?
This worked in my city when Scammers would steal wallets and purses and then call later claiming to be the police, and to meet them in "unmarked white police vans".
It's true, you can't fix stupid - but the smarter ones can... you know... at least provide useful information aiding in the capture.
Re:Duh (Score:1, Insightful)
Or unwavering trust in authority. Which is scarier?
Re:Can't Do Much (Score:3, Insightful)
This does provide yet another argument against the camp which thinks that understanding the tools they use is not important.
The message I get from all this is that computers really aren't ready for prime time. They're more like automobiles from the first decade of the 1900s.
Re:Scum (Score:4, Insightful)
God, there are some real scumbags in the world.
And a lot of fools.
Same here in the states (Score:2, Insightful)
I get calls once or twice per month that start out like this. I usually just yell "NOOOOO" like I'm dying into the phone and promptly hang up. It's good for a chuckle.
But seriously, warn all your normie friends about this. My parents were surprised such a thing would be a scam, and my mom's sister even got popped for $90 by these people. Of course, after I told her about it and she tried to call them back, the number was "no longer in service".
Education about the scam is the only way to avoid it.
Gullible would be an understatement (Score:3, Insightful)
... and tells them that Microsoft has detected a virus on their PC
Believing that Microsoft knows or cares if your machine has a virus is flat out ignorant. Being okay with the idea that Microsoft could monitor you is even worse.
Never mind shelling out hundreds to an stranger for doing nothing -- how many people are really so dense?
Re:Scum (Score:5, Insightful)
God, there are some real scumbags in the world.
Yes, but they are non-violent and require the cooperation of their "victims". Thus, they are like ticks, leeches, mosquitoes, flies, and worms: they are unpleasant and downright nasty but they serve a purpose. They provide a limiting function. They disincentivize ignorance and stupidity by making it more painful, just like those natural pests disincentivize improper sanitation. By becoming knowledgable and savvy, the "victim" can have total control over whether he/she is successfully targeted.
Really now, all it would take is a small amount of healthy skepticism. Let's assume the scammer is so good that there are no other "tells". A user would only need to say to the scammer "Microsoft found a virus on my PC did they? Let me get back to you" and then call Microsoft. As unpleasant as calling Microsoft would be, it beats giving money to a scammer. It's the same well-known principle used for dealing with suspicious communications from banks. If you don't know if that e-mail is really from your bank because you don't have the technical skill to determine that, then you ignore it and call your bank at their published phone number. Then it doesn't matter if it's the most clever phishing e-mail in the world.
It doesn't exactly require a genius to understand these things. It just requires that one not leap blindly into what they do not understand while expecting a good result. That's general advice for life, not just computing. I personally believe that almost everyone is capable of understanding these simple concepts, they just can't be bothered to think. Perhaps they need a little incentive. Perhaps by providing one the scammers are serving a purpose, even though I fully agree with you that they are scumbags. That's why I'd liken them to a carrion-eater or a parasite.
Re:All your money are belong to us (Score:3, Insightful)
How exactly does open source prevent social engineering scams?
Here's a thought (Score:1, Insightful)
Something about "an educated populace being the best defence against tyranny."
Then apply this to corporate interests.
Profit.
Re:Can't stop it? (Score:3, Insightful)
I believe what they meant by that comment is that there is nothing regulators can do to stop people for falling for social engineering scams. In what way do you presume them to be able to do so?
Re:Creative energy (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Can't Do Much (Score:3, Insightful)
How so?
People still don't understand cars and if ANYTHING goes wrong with them, they don't know why.
Consider, also, that a computer's software is custom to each person as they add in more software packages and settings.
That's roughly akin to someone buying a car and having custom parts put on without knowing much of what they do. They still have no clue when something goes wrong.
How many people can do much more maintenance on their car than fixing a flat tire? That's not much different than someone knowing how to run an antivirus once in awhile, imo.
Just like the poster you're replying to was saying, it is important to understand the tools we use so we know how the things we use work.
If we don't understand that then we're just as much in the dark be in computer trouble or car trouble.
Re:Scum (Score:3, Insightful)
They disincentivize ignorance and stupidity by making it more painful, just like those natural pests disincentivize improper sanitation./quote?
Yet the only reason why we care to disincentivize ignorance and stupidity is because those scammers exist. Your logic is viciously circular. They need to exist to protect people from themselves?
Re:Can't Do Much (Score:4, Insightful)
Uninformed people are still uninformed, regardless of how long the technologies been around.
Re:Can't Do Much (Score:2, Insightful)
Are you implying that there are no dishonest garage-men who charge $700 for replacing a $35 part? And that there are no car enthusiasts who spend their free time tinkering?
Re:Scum (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, but they are non-violent and require the cooperation of their "victims".
So does robbing somebody with an unloaded gun.
Re:Scum (Score:3, Insightful)
This is what the government-run schools are supposed to eliminate: Ignorance. But instead they ended-up glorified babysitting zones.
Re:All your money are belong to us (Score:2, Insightful)
To counter with an example from the real world just look at the malware infections of people installing screensavers for ubuntu. Where was the magic open source pixie dust to stop them. Oh yeah it doesn't exist.
Re:Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
A lot of it is psychological; users convince themselves that computers are too complicated for them to understand, so they are.
We had an app at work that ran on a Windows CE-based palmtop that nurses used to record patient notes on their visits and then synced back to a server when they got back to base. The users never had any problems with this at all. Then, when the palmtops were up for replacement, they swapped them out for notebooks running XP with exactly the same app (newer version, same UI) and sync process and suddenly none of the users were able to cope any more.
Despite the fact that the processes were identical, they saw the notebooks as "proper" computers as opposed to the palmtops that were just electronic notepads in their minds and they convinced themselves that as a proper computer it was too complex for them to understand. So much of the trouble with technology is users creating barriers in their own minds and it's largely of "our" own making for trying to convince users throughout the 90s that computers were easy to use and would do everything for them, when we all know that isn't true.
Re:Scum (Score:3, Insightful)
Doesn't that seem like circular logic to you? Con artists are good because they teach us not to trust con artists?
Re:Scum (Score:1, Insightful)
Yes, there are suckers, but stealing is stealing, even if the victim is easily duped. This is just a way that crooks can justify their actions. A person was dumb enough to not doublecheck a receipt, so two zeroes were punched on the card reader than one, and it is the victim's fault for not doing so. A person was handed a $5 instead of a $10, and it was their fault they didn't say anything. A car door is unlocked so the person was dumb enough to invite a thief in to slash the seats and steal the airbags. A door of a house is unlocked so it is the homeowner's fault that they got burglarized. A woman was dressed provocatively, so it is her fault that she got raped, and so on.
It doesn't matter if the victim is a blithering idiot and hands over a blank check. Fraud is still fraud. People who say that they are pouring chlorine in the gene pool by taking advantage of idiots are still crooks and are breaking the law regardless.
Re:I hate this sort of swindle (Score:4, Insightful)
and then after six months your machine crawls to a halt unless you give them more money for the next version
Six months? Well, that eliminates Windows at least. And OSX 10.3-6 have been on a two year cycle. The only OS I know that releases every six months as clockwork is Ubuntu, but I think you're doing it wrong...
Re:Scum (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't know where these people are going to school. I went to a public school in the USA, went to a decent university, grad school, and now job that actually utilizes critical thinking skills. I, and my high school friends, didn't turn out to be the fools that you would assume that we would be by going through public schools at each step. It's more likely that being ignorant is the easy way out and that's what people would rather choose instead.
Re:Scum (Score:2, Insightful)
Your logic is perfect. These scammers really do serve a purpose, as do rapists. If only their "victims" were acting less sexy and vulnerable! This will provide them an incentive.
Re:Scum (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, stealing is stealing, rape is rape etc and the criminal is to blame, but:
If I left a lot of cash in my car (plainly visible) and the doors unlocked and the money got stolen then a lot of people would ridicule me for doing it even though the thief is to blame because he still broke the law, but I should have anticipated it and hid the money or taken it with me. There is a reason why a bank keeps the money in a safe and why the clients would blame the bank if it kept the money in an unlocked box and the money got stolen.
Re:Wow (Score:5, Insightful)
It's the big secret of people who are 'knowledgeable' about computer.
50% of the time when 'help' someone do something, like send email...we don't know anything any more than they do. we're just reading the damn screen and doing what the logical thing would be, and we're not scared of doing the wrong thing. I mean, people ask me to help them send an attachment using a webmail system I'd never seen before:
Why don't you click on the 'Attach file' link there and select the file? Okay, where'd you save the file? Okay, select it, and then type something in the body, and press send. There you go. Yes, that's me, a computer genius, reading the screen like that and having the ability to use common dialog boxes.(1)
And another 25% of the time we're solving problems by applying basic computer knowledge. Like, very basic. Like 'able to learn in 10 hours' basic. Stuff like 'The World Wide Web works by your computer talking to another computer through even more computers.' and 'Video files tend to about 10 times as big as mp3s per minute.' and 'Wireless signals are often encrypted'.
And another 20% of the time it's stuff we've either run into before, and thus know what to do, or we fricking google it. Lacking the basic computer knowledge above just turns that 25% into this also. (I'm often like this on a Mac.)
There is almost no 'skill' involved at all. Half of it is just a willingness to say 'Okay, this looks right, let's try that'.
Only about 5% of the stuff people who are 'knowledgeable' about computers do for others as 'tech support', mainly stuff like buying/building computers, and programming, and other 'creative' stuff where you aren't fixing something that's broken, actually require any skill.
I mean, I have a younger brother who doesn't have any formal computer training outside of high school and an Office class for his associate degree. He's an auto mechanic.
But he grew up with a nerd and a half-nerd, so he knows how to operate his computer, and any questions from him are things like 'Should I go with AGP or should I pay more for PCI-E?' and 'This game is giving some sort of Direct X error on startup, and all I can find are suggestions to reinstall it and Direct X...which I've done. Ideas?'. This is because he learned 'the secret' to solve computer problems: Do the obvious thing, and if you don't know what that is, google what's wrong. And backup your computer so if it blows up, you can just reinstall.
1) Yes, yes, we've all fallen prey to the stupid inability to see things right in front of us, and someone else points it out instantly, but I'm not talking about that here.
Re:Scum (Score:3, Insightful)
Your attitude is just plain wrong.
Yes, but they are non-violent
There are worse things than violence. I'd rather be punched in the face than ripped off for thousands of dollars. There is no difference between an armed robbery and an unarmed robbery; stealing is stealing whether you use a gun or a computer.
require the cooperation of their "victims".
Trickery is not co-operation. I've met some damned smooth fraudsters in my time. And the fraudsters make one suspicious of the honest as well as the scum; I caused some embarrassment Sunday Night [slashdot.org] because of my unwillingness to trust caused by my being taken before.
They disincentivize ignorance and stupidity by making it more painful
EVERYONE is ignorant. Nobody knows everything. ANYONE can be fooled, even you, Mister Untouchable Knowitall. And stupidity is incurable; you sound like one of those people who would kill deformed babies because of their deformity.
just like those natural pests disincentivize improper sanitation.
There's your ignorance showing, son. No amount of sanitation will rid you of fleas and ticks, nor will it rid you of their diseases.
It doesn't exactly require a genius to understand these things.
Half of the world's population have two digit IQs, and are easy prey for the other half. If I were dishonest I'd have no trouble at all getting rich. You would have all those "subhumans" killed? I'd rather the world do away with heartless bastards like scammers, armed robbers, and you.
How that inaccurate flamebait got modded +4 insightful is beyond me.
Yes we can stop it (Score:3, Insightful)
Meanwhile, an assortment of British regulators have said there is nothing they can do to stop it.
Yes, there is something that we can do to stop this kind of activity. Find the people who are doing it and kill them. That usually stops it.
We don't need the people who are doing this. They don't contribute anything. They won't be missed by anybody. And if it means that their kids will be growing up without a daddy, well, then kill the kids too. They're only children, and the apple doesn't fall far from the tree. Save the future generations grief.
While it sounds extreme and tongue-in-cheek, it's not. I realize that it feels horrible to order and facilitate the extra-judicial execution of financial criminals. But it is a feeling that decreases with each new asshole that we stuff into the wood chipper. It's good for the computer community. It gives faith to the general people that we can police our own industry. We 'take out the trash'. Gangsters do this kind of thing all the time. Plus there are too many people in the world already. These jerks won't be missed.
Re:Wow (Score:4, Insightful)
A lot of it is psychological; users convince themselves that computers are too complicated for them to understand, so they are.
Where does this perception come from? Nothing is too complicated to understand if you work at it. I think people are just lazy and don't want to work at understanding the world around them.
Re:Scum (Score:3, Insightful)
Visiting "that neighborhood" is active participation. Drinking the drink someone gave you is "active participation."
Your post is absolute drivel. Scamming old people with Alzheimer's disease out of hundreds of dollars does not serve a social purpose. It is bad in any light. You are a moron.
Re:Scum (Score:3, Insightful)
It's worse than that; his logic is deeply flawed. Con artists teach us not to trust ANYONE, and that is not a good thing.
Re:Scum (Score:3, Insightful)
I have enough empathy to be honest about their weakness. Would you prefer I help them to remain in denial so that they forever remain victims? It's amazing how angry people sometimes become when you tell a victim that he/she doesn't have to be a victim anymore. You'd think that would be welcome news, a message of hope.
Except you are doing nothing to help people either identify or overcome their weaknesses before they are harmed. Instead, you are creating a baroque rationalization to legitimize your own indifference to the harm being committed to a fellow human being, as gullible and foolish as they may be. This is why your position isn't a message of hope because it boils down to "Meh, why should I care what happens to those losers anyway?"
I also reject the notion that an individual has to be a helpless victim, at the mercy of anyone who would wish to do him/her harm. To tell people that they are helpless victims who can do nothing to better their own situation, who will always be exploited by criminals, who are completely screwed since the regulators won't protect them and they cannot protect themselves, well, I say that is sociopathy. It's telling them that they are forever doomed to just bend over and take it. Does it ever occur to you that this victim mentality is precisely why we have so many petty criminals?
My longing to live in a kinder, wiser, more sane world is beyond my power of expressing it. Really, there are not words for how badly I wish to see that. The way to get from here to there is to be honest about our weaknesses and our problems, to seek realistic solutions to them. This absolutely includes the notion that an individual can better himself or herself, that honesty about one's shortcomings and understanding one's weaknesses is the first step towards overcoming them. It's not "blaming the victim". It's "empowering the victim". And you can't stand it, can you?
I see, so it's either a nanny-state or the jungle with no other options available? How about you as an informed and savvy computer user, who by their own admission longs "to live live in a kinder, wiser, more sane world is beyond my power of expressing it", could help by giving a class on how to spot potential computer fraud? No matter what your situation is currently, you probably have the ability to teach people like this how not to be a victim. For example you could approach your local service/charity groups in your community or even a community college. If nothing else, you could record a tutorial on the subject and host it on a personal web-site.
In the unlikely event that you are already doing something to actually proactively help people, I offer a preemptive apology. Yet, due to the nature of your post it probably isn't warranted.
In conclusion, you certainly a have the right to your indifference towards others and no one can or should force you to care about anyone else. However, at least have the decency to be honest about your indifference and not use some faux-intellectual smoke-screen to pretend that you, or these criminals for that matter, are really doing the people harmed by fraud some sort of favor!
Re:Scum (Score:3, Insightful)
I pity the ignorant. I do not pity the willfully ignorant, but I pity the ignorant.
Although with some common sense one could tell this is a scam, your very presence here means your use and understanding of technology far exceeds that of the median average, in nearly any western country. You needn't be an ass about that.