Dirty rotten scoundrels

[fragger]

Attempted scam no. 1:

Not once, but twice now this last couple of months, I've received a phone call from some Indian claiming to be a technician from Microsoft informing me that I probably have malware on my machine as a result of my opening malicious emails. This altruistic soul offered to clean all the harmful rubbish out for me, and all I had to do to redeem this offer of goodwill was allow him to gain remote access to my PC.

To emphasize just what a genuine fellow and how much in tune with the Aussie psyche he was, he repeatedly referred to me as "mate". Well, nice try, "mate", but it's been a long, long time since the shower fell that I happened to come down with.

A confirmatory check online revealed that this is a well-known scam. The perp will get his mark to open a log file or some such and ask the user if he or she recognizes any of the files therein. They are usually legitimate files or entries, but not ones that an average user would recognize, and thus the con artist will convince their victim that this represents malware. If the by-now frightened user goes along and grants the crim remote access (the crim will instruct them in how to do this), said crim will then make a pretense of "cleaning" the bad stuff out, usually by running a copy of a trial version of a defrag program or registry cleaner of some sort for appearances' sake, but will surreptitiously disable the user's firewall and remote access-blocking when they determine that the user has gotten sick of watching after an hour or so, and will install a remote access app (often ammyy) on the machine to allow them to remote-access that PC whenever they like in the future.

Unfortunately, there are a lot of people out there who may not be terribly knowledgeable about computers who could conceivably fall for this con. And if they're silly enough to keep their banking details in some place like their Documents folder, they could one day suddenly find themselves somewhat poorer.

The first time this clown called me, he hung up after realising that the probing questions I began asking him tagged me as someone who was computer-savvy enough not to fall for his attempted grift.

The second time he (or another of his brethren) called was after I'd had a long hard day at w@&k and was in no mood to be trifled with. As far as I can recollect, after hearing him out long enough to confirm that this was indeed the same scam being attempted, I replied with a response that I won't repeat verbatim in this polite company but in abridged form equated to "You are a larcenous person who was conceived out of wedlock, your story is comparable to a large collection of male bovine faeces, and if you call here again I will be rather terse with you" before ending with a threat involving the blowing of a fornicating sports whistle down the phone.

I don't actually own a sports whistle, but I'm seriously thinking of getting one. Strike three for this mug will hopefully result in hearing impairment and/or a lingering case of tinnitus. Hopefully he'll be wearing a headset as I've heard that the nasty whistle trick can still w@&k with those, but not so much with a standard hand-held receiver. It might at least startle the daylights out of the lowlife mongrel.

I would never, ever do that to a legitimate albeit annoying telemarketer, but an outright criminal trying to get his filthy hands on my hard-earned is another matter. And what would he do about it - call the cops? Besides, I would assume that an Indian person would be well-versed in the principles of karma.

Attempted scam no. 2:

As some of you may recall, in March/April 2013 I travelled to down to Melbourne to attend a big air show. Not having visited Melbourne for many years, I got caught out when I found myself on a freeway that bypassed the city (which was fine as I didn't want to get stuck in the CBD) but which accepted only electronic toll payments. I do possess an E-toll device for when I visit Sydney, but these won't w@&k in another state. By the time I realised how I'd snafued myself it was too late for me to get off the freeway before I reached the toll-gates, so of course when I passed through a gate I caught the subliminal flash of a toll-booth camera as it photographed my license plate.

Later that night in my hotel room I got online to see if there was anything I could do about it, and since this is apparently a common occurrence with out-of-town visitors who don't know any better, there was. I learned that I could pay the toll retrospectively provided that I did so within, I think, three days, and so that was what I did.

Ever since, every few months or so, I get an email from some outfit claiming to represent the Melbourne E-toll company (they call it Ezy-Toll or something down there) informing me that my toll debt is still outstanding and that I need to pay up forthwith or face a fine. These emails go straight into my "Deleted" folder unopened. A check online confirmed what I suspected - this is another known scam. Surprise surprise - I've been chucking these bogus payment requests in to my Deleted folder ever since, and what do you know - no fine ever gets issued against me.

But a question is begged - if this is a known scam, and it's been going on for so long, why can't something be done about it? Obviously the Australian authorities can't do a great deal about scam no. 1 since it apparently is being perpetrated from India, but why not no. 2, which originates here?

Whatever the case, thieves just plain suck, and I can only hope that when they croak and become interred, somebody will steal their headstones.

[Art Blade]

nice rant.  :-D

Pretty annoying stuff. I completely agree with you and despite the seriousness I enjoyed reading it. How much time did you spend finding a way to write around what you actually hollered down the phone? 

For all that w@&k and so forth, here a +1 :-X from me, MATE  :-()

I hope that they leave you alone. Else, find their headstones, remove them, and stick a cheap sign up the grave reading "away for corrective maintenance" ^-^

[mandru]

I think that everyone's local phone company should be required to offer free nuisance filtering to screen out all international and/or toll free calls if the subscriber requests it.

[fragger]

...stick a cheap sign up the grave reading "away for corrective maintenance" ^-^

Nice :-D

Thanks for the kudo, Art :) In answer to your question, actually not much time at all. I've always been fairly good at euphemisms - in print and after the fact, anyway :-()

@ mandru, I forgot to mention that one of the most irksome aspects of scam no. 1 was that I do in fact have a free call blocking service enabled with my phone company which screens out calls from telemarketers and such, but these crims are getting around it. I noticed the second time they called me that the caller ID on my phone indicated "Private", so evidently their calls are being interpreted as ones originating from private citizens by whatever process the phone company uses to screen out nuisance calls ::)

It's ironic. Telemarketers, who are generally on the up and up, get blocked, but real shysters get through :D

[Art Blade]

Don't you guys have the caller's phone number shown in the display?

So you can decide whether or not to pick up and, for later use, the number gets stored in the phone as an option, if you want it? We can choose to have our numbers "suppressed" or to have them displayed.

Since it's not allowed here (or, illegal) to probe random people for whatever type of marketing or opinion poll, companies are virtually forced to display their numbers when calling someone which allows the one being called to jot down the number and take whatever measures necessary against the caller, probably even call the police or whatever. Companies over here must not call without prior express approval. Which is why I once told someone who called me at home that they remove my number from their data base and never call me again because they didn't have my approval and I made it clear that in case I should ever see their number again on my display, I'd take measures against their company. I haven't heard of them since.  :-D

[PZ]

We have a National "no call" list, but there are those companies that regularly violate that list.  We do have a call block feature on our phones, but until recently, we could automatically block private citizens, but not telemarketers - I still swear that the phone company was selling our numbers to the telemarketers!

Anyone can opt to have their number come up as "Private", which then does not show the number on caller ID.

I hardly answer my phone unless it is a family member these days

[fragger]

Call blocking here screens out telemarketers, but legitimate registered charity organizations such as the Salvation Army or the National Heart Foundation can still get through. A call from the latter was what woke me up this morning in fact, which was my first day off from w@&k in ages and my first sleep in for weeks, but they do do good w@&k so I was polite to them :-() These calls are fairly rare though, so I can live with them.

Normally an incoming phone number is displayed on my phone, but as with PZ's case, people can choose to have their number appear as "Private".

[Art Blade]

interesting. We don't have that "private" thing. Just either the number or anonymous. Also, I don't know whether or not there are any numbers being filtered. Maybe due to our laws that basically prohibit those intrusive calls. What we can do, however, is to make the phone company block numbers starting with a known set of digits (you may know the type of 0800- ) that would otherwise cost money, usually being used by companies for some weird "services."

[Binnatics]

I think 'anonymous' or 'private is the same. People indeed block their number tot the receiving person. I only pick up anonymous phone calls because my w@&k does that as well; I have to :-\\

We have a very well functioning "don't call me" register, so telemarketers of any kind don't bother me anymore. I've never been insulted the way Fragger described by phone. I did recently receive phishing emails though,and cleaver as I am I recognized it as false, but I was shocked by the quality of the falsified web pages trying to convince me to 'connect my current bank account number to my new IBAN bank account number'. I think these fucks fool people every day with their phishing tricks. When I called the bank they weren't even surprised, asked me to forward the email to their phishing desk as if it was an everyday matter, and thanked me for calling. It really was unsatisfying. Like calling the cops after becoming victim of a burglary being told that you can come to their desk next monday :o \:/

Recently, there was something to do about a robbery of a jewelry store where the owner's wife had grabbed a gun and shot both robbers to death. It was quite a discussion weather the woman had to be brought to court for murder or not. Now I suddenly realize that this woman at least had the ability of buying a gun and keeping it at hand to defend herself although against the law(it was the second time that her husband's store got robbed by armed thugs). I always feel so helpless when someone digitally violates my privacy or tries to rob me. I Wish I could simply blow up his computer in his face by sending a certain inscription, something like explode*.*  >:D

[Art Blade]

wow, that's quite drastic.. it would be cool to have a proper security so nothing like that could get through in the first place.

[fragger]

I had to go to my bank the other day on another matter entirely and while I was there I mentioned scam no. 1 to the teller and inquired about what my options would have been had I fallen for the con and my account been drained. The lady I spoke to was not only unsurprised but went on to tell me about how she and her husband get calls from these dickheads quite often, and that as soon as she or hubby mentions the fact that they have a Mac and not a PC, the scammer promptly hangs up ::) She went on to tell me that the bank has a kind of standard "conflict claim" for this sort of thing, that's how prevalent this scam is. More often than not (and I suspect, depending on how much money is involved), the bank will reimburse the victim.

Some of these scamming bastards go to great lengths to suck people in. Every once in a while I get a junk email from "FedEx" trying to convince me that there is some sort of "delivery problem" that I need to straighten out with them - which no doubt translates as "give us your money, you gullible dope". This is quite a remarkable phenomenon considering that I haven't ordered anything online for years and nothing that I did order ever came via FedEx. These requests naturally go straight in the trash.

Binn, your story of that lady in the jewellery shop sounds like something that would happen here. There have been several instances in this country of burglaries and robberies where the business owners or residents have taken steps to protect themselves or their property which have resulted in death for the offender, only for the defenders to find themselves facing charges of murder or manslaughter. I'm of the opinion that if an individual breaks into someone's home or business premises with the intention of robbing them, they takes their chances, and if they become dead as a result, well, that's the chance they took - they gambled and lost.

I believe that people have every right to defend themselves in their own homes or places of business by whatever means necessary, if they feel inclined to do so. If a would-be robber comes off second-best in the process, that's just the luck of the draw.

[Binnatics]

I would like to agree fully with you, but I still think there's a tricky part to this opinion. It inflicts that people may buy and use fire weapons to protect themselves. In the case of a jewelry shop owner, especially one that already suffered an earlier armed robbery, it doesn't sounds crazy at all, but where would you draw the line? I think if we start allowing stuff like that we start loosing faith in our police apparatus and we move quite a bit towards anarchy.

A lot of people are simply too dump to cope with such a deal of freedom of acting, which would make our society rather dangerous.  :o

In the case I described the prosecutor decided not to sue the shop owner's wife for murder or manslaughter, since they would expect the judge to not plead guilty. They wanted to spare the woman the extra trauma of a process. They will however sue the husband for illegal weapon ownership. After all I think that last thing was a wise action, but I still think it's better to let the judge decide wether the woman was guilty or not, despite the pain who may be inflicted. That's what judges are for.

On the other hand, I think the exploding command would be totally appropriate, proportional and subsidiary. Internet IS one big anarchy after all >:D

[mandru]

Obviously this is simply a huge misunderstanding!

She was going to give the criminal the gun to bribe him to not rob her.

But then thought it was unsafe for the gun to have bullets in it.  :-\\

Shooting the gun was the only way she knew of to unload it!

It's all so unfair.  :'(



Faith in the police apparatus?  Jeez where to start with that one.  :-\\

I hold a concealed carry permit in my State here in the U.S. and in return for that my name, photo, personal information and fingerprints are submitted every 24 hours to a national crime data base operated by the Federal Government and only if all my information returns clean do I get to keep the permit.

Police officers in my state only have to receive the exact same screening twice a year.  A person who becomes a police officer is not automatically awarded secret wings and halo they are still just a person and many people have a wide range of reasons for becoming a police officer.

Not all of those reasons for becoming a cop are admirable.  Search Youtube for the word police or cop and and you can find tons of these public servants acting like they have forgotten who pays their wages and ultimately who it is they really w@&k for.  True it may be that these bad officers are only a fraction of a percent of the total but then even the best of them can have a bad day and make a poor decision because of that.



There is natural law that has existed before man ever stacked two rocks one on the other.  If you stick your head in a bear den and start poking a bear cub with a sharp stick it is only natural to expect to have an enraged mama bear to respond to her cub's cries and rip your freaking head off.  It's all simple and even poetic really.  ^-^

[Binnatics]

Mama bear is simple and poetic, but assault rifles can do a lot of damage in a 'civilized' society :-\\

[mandru]

I understand that we are from very different cultural backgrounds and I wouldn't try to suggest that either of us is purely right or wrong.  Let's just say that we each see things through glasses with different lenses of perspective.

More damage than cutting someone's head off from behind and then slashing another woman's throat and face?  Even if the tools just a knife?  We're not going to seek to banish all knives next are we?

This article has the story above background info as originally posted by the Associated Press; curated by Jason Howerton and is not affiliated with the site this links to:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/09/30/oklahoma-beheading-suspect-uttered-arabic-words-during-attack-had-infatuation-with-beheadings-prosecutor/


While maybe not as poetic and simple when dealing with the uncivilized it was an assault rifle that stopped this cognizant criminal's (acting under conviction) rampage in its tracks and now he is in the hands of society to determine his fate.

Another fully justified and fully deserved .45 cent bullet very well could have saved society a long drawn out court case that will probably run into tens of millions of dollars but I guess that's the price we pay for being civilized.

[fragger]

I can appreciate both sides of this coin. Cultural background does come into it to an extent, I think. The first time I saw one of PZ's photos taken at his house and saw an automatic pistol just sitting there on the table amongst other commonplace household items it was, to me, a bit of a jolting sight - at first. Gun laws are so strict here that one can't even buy a single-shot air rifle without a license. Plus we don't have to worry about getting mauled by large predators if we go outside, even in the bush, so on further reflection it made sense for PZ to have a weapon readily to hand, given where he lives. Mainly it jolted me because living where I do I would no more expect to see a pistol lying on someone's kitchen table than I would some alien artifact.

There have been so many horror stories about home invasions that if I found myself being one of the invaded, I would fight tooth, nail and dirty to protect myself, because you just never know how potentially dangerous the invader may be. If I had a firearm, I would at least threaten with it and give the intruder the option of leaving with his hide intact (provided I got the chance to do that - there may not be time for such niceties), but if the perp still persisted in coming at me, then yes, I believe I would pull the trigger. Without a firearm, I would just as soon take a swing at them with the first weighty and blunt object that came to hand, and if it resulted in that person's death, naturally I would be remorseful but I would not feel guilty.

I think I mentioned elsewhere on this forum some time ago a case in Australia where a man who was residing above a hotel was awakened by a young crim climbing in through one of his windows. The resident took a swing at the young hood with a cricket bat, not with any kind of mean intent, but simply to give the intruder an incentive to climb back out. The bat connected with the young guy's head in such a way that it killed him, even though it wasn't a hard hit. The bat-wielder then found himself facing a murder charge, but in this case he was eventually cleared of any wrongdoing, and as far as I'm concerned he did indeed do no wrong. Had a gun been used instead of a bat, the criminal may have ended up just as dead.

It is a tricky issue, but I still believe that one's home is sacrosanct, and if another one decides to violate the sanctity of that home and dies as a result, then that one played his cards and lost.

When it comes to a place of business, then arguably it can be a little more complicated. Many years ago I worked in a petrol station, and I was held up twice whilst working there. The first time was almost laughable, a couple of dingbat kids who I could have easily gotten the better of, but since the princely sum of $86.50 in the till was involved, I couldn't be bothered (of course I didn't tell them about the $500 worth of change in a drawer out the back). The second time, the thief was actually apologetic, and since another relatively trifling sum was involved, I couldn't be bothered then either. The store's insurance covered both robberies anyway, and it wasn't my money being swiped, so it wasn't worth me trying to be a hero, even if I had been inclined.

But in the same week that my second holdup took place, another petrol station across town was robbed (this was when I lived in Sydney) and the attendant was stabbed to death after handing over the money, apparently just for the hell of it. In my two instances I knew I was in no such danger, but if the attendant in that instance had whipped out a gun and shot the thief he could have saved his own life.

I guess there's no easy answer to things like this, but if it's a case of self-defense, I believe that any inadvertent killing is justifiable.

[Binnatics]

Well said both of you. I just wanted to make the point that we as a society should be careful enough to prevent any dull stupefied prick to use any nasty weapon without the threat of a judge suing his a$$. Making any kind of self defence when speaking of home invasion a legal deed would imho make it too easy for the not-so-intelligent amongst us to kill someone and get away with it.
I believe in the triangular power system; law-making, law-maintaining and law-speaking. We shouldn't skip the judge.

[PZ]

I just love the discussions we have.  On all corners of the world we give our points of view, and then begin to understand the view points of others - I wish the entire world had the benefit of our type of interactions.  War might be a thing of the past.

[Art Blade]

 :-X :)

We shouldn't skip the judge.

Are you saying we should shoot him, too?




<runs away screaming> :-()

[Binnatics]

:-X :)

Are you saying we should shoot him, too?




<runs away screaming> :-()

:-X