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.
Re:Scum (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah. What morally responsible individual would ruin the good name of Microsoft?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I'm not sure, but I think you just called Microsoft's development staff "morally irresponsible." That's not very nice. ;)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Whilst I am going to have to flog myself for XKCD linking...
WE RUN LINUX! [xkcd.com]
Re: (Score:2)
And through exploitation of that charming, authoritative British accent, no less! I mean, who wouldn't believe someone who called you up sounding like Simon Cowell or Tony Blair?
Re:Scum (Score:4, Insightful)
God, there are some real scumbags in the world.
And a lot of fools.
Re: (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.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The story below that recently appeared [notalwaysright.com] on Not Always Right [notalwaysright.com] seems appropriate:
(A customer is wondering why her anti-virus is asking her to purchase the program.)
Me: "What is the name of your anti-virus?"
Customer: "It is [name of a well-known fake anti-virus program]."
Me: "Ma'am, that is a fake anti-virus. Do not purchase that program because it will not protect your computer."
Customer: "No! Why do you want me to disable my anti-virus? I will not get rid of it! It's keeping my computer safe! I alread
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: (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:Scum (Score:5, Interesting)
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?
I'm glad you raised this point. It's a good one, to be sure.
Being wise and savvy and seeking understanding is the natural state of human beings. The widespread ignorance and stupidity is what I might call "unnaturally natural". The proof is that by not viewing ignorance and gullibility as problems in need of correction, people leave themselves vulnerable to this type of scam. The scammers do not create this vulnerability. They merely capitalize on it. They see that something is out of order and that this creates room for them to operate. Otherwise their dubious "enterprise" would never get off the ground.
The ignorance and stupidity is a disease state. The scammers are the disease that can thrive in the environment of that disease state. They are symptoms, not the actual problem. It's absurdity itself to say that the only reason to eschew ignorance and stupidity is because these scammers exist. Have you no concept of how much better our world would be if ignorance and stupidity were not such powerful forces in shaping it?
The personal shortcomings that scammers exploit go far, far beyond computing. They also play important roles in politics, the economy, interpersonal relationships, you name it. It just so happens that computing provides a convenient entry point for that ignorance and stupidity to come under attack since it is generally encouraged in other realms like politics.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
This is what the government-run schools are supposed to eliminate: Ignorance. But instead they ended-up glorified babysitting zones.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
In fact I'd say that the public schools bear more responsibility than anyone else for the widespread ignorance and gullibility that these scammers feed on. A truly tough-minded population familiar with critical thinking, logic, and argumentation would not so easily fall for these scams. They also wouldn't support anything our politicians of today are pushing for. So you see that'd be really inconvenient for our increasingly centralize
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: (Score:3, Interesting)
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.
I'm grateful that you and some others are raising such good points in this discussion. I usually enjoy participating in Slashdot but not usually this much. For that I am glad, for this is truly stimulating.
What I would point out here is a particular disconnect. My high school also taught some critical thinking skills, though in narrow and very specific applications. By that I mean, they were utilized only at the request of some kind of authority figure. There always had to be a "gun to the head" in
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
The government-run schools in the USA are designed to be indoctrination stations and they function brilliantly. They produce a steady stream of soldiers and criminals in addition to undesirables like journalists and human rights lawyers. Meanwhile, those who know utilize private tutors, home schooling, and/or private schooling so that their children receive an education in using their minds.
Re: (Score:2)
In a more ideal world, the government should the be convicted of fraud and told to keep their hands out of educating our youth.
An educated public, in the minds of those running governments, are a very dangerous thing, unless they are "educated the right way"....
Re: (Score:2)
"Stupidity" is correct. Isn't 185 pounds equal to $350?
Even if I was a complete luddite, before I spent that kind of money I'd either (a) buy a brand new computer for the same price or (b) Do nothing and live with the virus. But I guess "a fool and his money are soon parted" still applies even today.
Re: (Score:2)
"Stupidity" is correct. Isn't 185 pounds equal to $350?
More like $280 at current exchange rates according to Google, though that may need to be adjusted to account for cost-of-living factors to be properly representative of the equivalent cost. Not an amount to be unconcerned about in any case though.
Re: (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: (Score:2)
So does robbing somebody with an unloaded gun.
The threat of violence is much closer to "violent" than "non-violent." If one believes that the person asking for (or demanding, in your example) money has a firearm, compliance with their demands would probably be the wise choice. I would, however, characterize a willingness to give money to anybody who calls me on the phone as an unwise choice.
Re:Scum (Score:4, Informative)
Um actually it would be violent because coercing someone by displaying a firearm has the implicit attachment of "do what I say or I will shoot you". If you fuck around and hold someone up with a toy gun and think you can get cutesy with the police saying "hang on officers let me remember just what those ACLU videos told me about getting arrested oh and by the way it was a toy gun lol so you guys cant even get me in trouble" you would be in for a shitty surprise. Fucking around with toy guns can get you in trouble; for example making them appear real and threatening someone with violence is also illegal even if you had no intention or ability to follow through.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but they are non-violent and require the cooperation of their "victims".
So does robbing somebody with an unloaded gun.
Only if you tell the victim that your gun isn't loaded up front. Then you're relying on their own mind to imagine a scenario where your gun really is loaded, but you're lying for some reason. That way, the threat of violence is entirely imagined on their part.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
So, what you're saying is that we need scammers to scam people to protect them scammers?
I gotta better idea. Why don't we just start telling everyone that they can rid their PCs of viruses and malware if they scrub it in the bathtub with the power on?
Re: (Score:2)
I gotta better idea. Why don't we just start telling everyone that they can rid their PCs of viruses and malware if they scrub it in the bathtub with the power on?
Truth is one, paths are many.
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
"Yes, but they are non-violent and require the cooperation of their 'victims'... 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."
You're a fucking sociopath. Have a little empathy or fuck off.
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, a pro-union teacher believes that saying "critical thinking is a basic survival skill" is sociopathic. I'm shocked - shocked I tell you.
Re: (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 availabl
Re: (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: (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: (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
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
It's a bit easier to act like weeding people out based on how they fall victim to crime is a good thing when you are a hundred percent sure that you wouldn't fall for the crime discussed. On Slashdot, people act like they are smarter than crime because they don't fall for phone scams and banner ads but maybe they would fall victim to bullets that weren't aimed at them but.. oh shit look you walked in the wrong area at the wrong time of night! Well aren't you glad those nice guntoting thugs taught you a valu
Re: (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
Re: (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.
Can't Do Much (Score:2)
Well, yeah. You can't fix stupid. You can't fix gullible.
"A fool and his money are soon parted."
This does provide yet another argument against the camp which thinks that understanding the tools they use is not important.
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: (Score:2)
Probably Skype (or something similar) as the article suggests.
The phone number is on the scam website: http://www.thenerdsupport.com/ [thenerdsupport.com] (+44 20 3318 8706 if you feel like messing about with them, that's a normal landline so shouldn't cost much/anything to call from outside the UK).
Re: (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: (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
Re:Can't Do Much (Score:4, Insightful)
Uninformed people are still uninformed, regardless of how long the technologies been around.
Re: (Score:2)
The "you warrentee has expired" robocalling scam of 2009 was one of the largest and most successful in recent times. This is certainly not a computer-specific problem.
Re:Can't Do Much (Score:4, Interesting)
Such scams are at least tried. I've had two calls to my house in the last year telling me that my car's warranty is due to expire and if I want to continue it I have to renew before the expiry date or it will cost more then twice as much to renew after that date. Would I like to renew now by card over the phone? I do not own a car and have never owned a car.
On both occasions I asked played concerned for a moment and asked "which of the cars?" at which point they hung up - obviously anyone asking any questions just makes them run as they don't have any real data other than name and phone number. Once you ask a questions about something they should know if they were who they hope the intended victim thinks they are their "cover" is blown, but they only need a few people who are not cynical/careful enough to check details in order for the operation to be profitable and said victim is no wiser until they try claim on the warranty by which time the scammers have long gone and covered their tracks.
Re: (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: (Score:2)
You still have to get a license to drive one, so automobiles don't seem to be ready for prime time either. ;)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
The message I get is that users really aren't ready for prime time. They're more like prehistoric monkeys.
Re: (Score:2)
This isn't really a problem that open source software would solve.
You would still have users out there that can fail for these old fashioned confidence scams.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
How exactly does open source prevent social engineering scams?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Callie: Really? What version of winblows am I using right now?
Scamer: Windows XP.
Callie: Try again there buddy, I use Linux. (click)
Re: (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: (Score:2)
That has nothing to do with Linux being open source or not. Linux could be closed source and a windows virus or malware won't run on it.
More like this (Score:3, Funny)
Scammer: Microsoft detected a virus on your PC.
Callie: OMG, Microsoft ssh'd to my box, guessed a login name and password, and then escalated from that user's privileges to the point where they had read access to everything, thereby allowing them to scan my whole filesystem hierarchy for viruses?
Scammer: Yep.
Callie: Holy crap, that means I'm compromised! How do I close the hole that Microsoft used?
Scammer: Download this program, chmod +x it, and sudo run it.
Callie: Ok!
Re: (Score:2)
How exactly does open source prevent social engineering scams?
Open Source is often accused of not being "user-friendly" because it caters to savvy users who know what they're doing. At the very least, it assumes that the user wishes to understand even if they do not have that understanding now. It is not sold to anyone based on how "easy to use" it is or how little expertise is required to use it. It is not sold as a substitute for knowing what you're doing as many Windows apps are.
So perhaps Open Source in the strictest isolation doesn't prevent social engineer
Unfortunately, it works. (Score:2, Insightful)
You can only do so much to save the end-user from themselves.
You would have done well... (Score:2)
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.
Re:Wow (Score:5, Informative)
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:Wow (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm out of mod points, but the above is very insightful. I can relate seeing, on many occasions, where a dead simple UI, no more complex than say that of an ATM, becomes utterly confounding just because it's being presented with a PC in sight. In one case: as long as the PC was hidden, and the UI was accessed via a touchscreen --- everything was fine. As soon as mouse, keyboard and the PC case became visible, people would say that "something broke" and that I should bring it back to the "way it was before". This was a big eye opener when it comes to usability: users are not rational. Not at all.
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: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: (Score:2)
i have 2 resident people who e-mail me constantly to tell me the e-mail is down.. (they send it from gmail)
in reality? they didn't bother connecting the VPN - instead they just closed the popup asking for their password..
i hear from one of them at least every 2 weeks..
Re: (Score:2)
One emailed me to tell me their email wasn't working. Yes I know we have all read it in a comic but it's true.
I believe you. I actually had one of those. Someone emailed me, saying, "My email is not working." I replied saying something like, "Seems to be working. Is it only when you send email to specific people?"
I got an email back saying something like, "Nope. Still not working. I cannot send or receive email at all, with anyone. I think the mail server is down."
Sometimes you just hope your being trolled, since the alternative is too sad.
Re: (Score:2)
You would be surprised how many there are. I work as a network admin and I have dealt with some .... interesting?.... people.
I worked for a web hosting company before where one of our clients was having supposed issues with their mailing list, they said some users were not receiving messages sent to the list.
I checked out the mailing list code (it was an in-house solution) and then looked through the mail servers' log files and found nothing in there that supports their claims. So, I decided to email the mailing list to get to the bottom of this. I introduced myself and asked everyone to reply to me if they received the message b
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How dumb do you have to be to be beaten to a pulp and have your emptied wallet thrown down onto your face?
A crime is a crime.
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.
Re: (Score:2)
Ah, but by the time you make the download of the remote assistance code, are you sure their computer is in a good state? A guy calls you on the phone and, before asking for any money, manages to make you install a malware dropper. It's just a different vector than the warez/video codec downloaders that do the same thing, and install a fake anti-virus on your computer.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Part of the scam is that they get you to download the remote-control software before they tell you they'll charge you. At that point, they can hold your computer hostage.
Re: (Score:2)
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.
The first thing that came across my mind is that £185 is probably more than the vast majority of the computers these people are using. I know it's certainly more than what my computers are worth. If somebody tried to charge me that much to fix my (5-year-old) computer, I'd say "No thanks" and buy a new computer.
Re:Duh (Score:4, Funny)
Well, I've been doing the more brains than money thing for quite a while and I'd like to try it the other way around just to see what all the hype is about. There are so many of those people out there I figure they must be on to something.
Re:Duh (Score:5, Interesting)
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.
Its no different to being told by a cold calling builder that your roof is sagging and needs several thousands of pounds of repairs done to make it safe. House owner coughs up, builder potters around in the attic for a day and legs it. One house owner that is a lot of money down for no reason other than fraud.
Unfortunately, these seem to be being reported in the news all too often today :(
I hate this sort of swindle (Score:5, Funny)
It's like the one where some dubious company persuades you to install some new version of their operating system claiming that it's super fast and totally secure, etc. etc. and then after six months your machine crawls to a halt unless you give them more money for the next version which is faster, more secure, etc. etc.
Oh wait...
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...
And ... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Creative energy (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Creative energy (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
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.
Re: (Score:2)
Education about SCAMS is the only way to avoid it. Otherwise the next scam that's slightly different in nature has you falling for it too.
Companies do not contact you for things like this. Banks do not phone you up and, if they do, you say "Fine, I'll contact customer services in my own good time and resolve the issue" - that way *YOU* phone the bank and thus are sure that it is the bank that you have phoned, and that there is a REAL outstanding problem.
How did Microsoft get the phone number? How dare th
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
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: (Score:3, Funny)
Lots and lots of people. People shop at Walmart, for crying out loud.
Same thing, but not techie (Score:5, Interesting)
They call old people telling them that their grandson is involved in some sort of a car accident, and need money for bail or pay the affected part for the damages, anyway they tell them that if they don't get the money his/her beloved grandson will be in jail for a long time
Then, they ask for the address to send a messenger to pick up the payment, in terms of cash, LCD TV, Blu-ray, etc.
And people fell for it... even the ones without a grandson
Not even remotely new (Score:4, Informative)
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
Spammers have been doing the same thing for years. The "Canadian Pharmacy" sites always claim to be "verified by visa", "hacker safe", "bbb approved", etc... Any half-wit knows how to copy the logos from some other web page and use them to make your page look more legit than it really is.
Re: (Score:2)
So... (Score:2)
Run text (Score:2, Interesting)
My mother-in-law had a call like this last year - they told her to type "temp spyware" and "prefetch unwanted" into the Run box on her PC to prove it was infected..
Our system says "don't go there" (Score:4, Interesting)
The actual site mentioned is thenerdsupport.com [thenerdsupport.com]
I ran them through our SiteTruth system. Here's what comes out. [sitetruth.com] "Rating: "Site ownership unknown or questionable. No Location. ... This certificate identifies the domain only, not the actual business.
No street address found on the site."
Compare the SiteTruth results for Geek Squad. [sitetruth.com] Street addresses found, found in the US business directory, found in Open Directory.
It's not that hard to sort out the phony business sites from the real ones. You have to check business databases, not just the Web, for business legitimacy. If you just look at the web, you get bogus results like this: McAfee SiteAdvisor [siteadvisor.com]: "We tested this site and didn't find any significant problems." The site itself doesn't try to attack the user, so McAfee says it's good to go.
This is actually what happens (Score:4, Informative)
Actually, they kept calling me for weeks, every couple of days. Here's what actually happens.
It's a Bangladesh call centre.
They call up and say that a problem on my computer has been reported to them. Of course, I know this is not true. But one time, I went along with it to find out what they were up to.
They actually talk you through getting the windows event log up on the screen - and make you count the "error" entries. Of course there are error entries.
So, they say, that proves you have a problem. My parents, for example, would be completely convinced at this point.
Then they make you go to a web site, and download a remote control application. At that point I hung up. There is no way I'm giving control of my PC over to some whackjob on the phone.
They kept calling for about two weeks, every couple of days. We're on the do not call list - which in the UK means its illegal for them to call us. And they call asking for "Mr Bruce" after I answer - my wife's name and mine are different, and the phone is in her name.
The last time they called I asked to speak to their "manager" and I told them to look out the window because the police are coming to get them. What else am I going to do? Then they finally stopped calling.
Hey this is good! (Score:2)
"... something which both companies have failed to act upon."
If this was in the US, McAfee and MS would lose their respective trademarks for failure to enforce them. What's the law in the UK like in this area?
Suspicious part.. the call itself (Score:2)
So how did the "company" explain the phone call in the first place? I highly doubt when people have to register for Windows XP activation they actually leave their phone number. And if so, how does a 3rd party get said phone number?
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.
We're so smart (Score:3, Informative)
This started months ago... (Score:3, Informative)
...when I and several other people submitted it to slashdot, complete with links to the PC Pro story that ran in February IIRC.
Thanks for the public service announcement Timothy.
If only it had been put out when it was first starting, hundreds of other people might have been warned.
Grrrrr.
Justin.
Re: (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: (Score:2)
Because making something illegal means that no one ever does that act, right? Secondly, making fraud illegal is just something to prevent people from trying to commit these con jobs. It has absolutely no bearing on the fact that people will still fall for them.