FTC Shuts Down Pop-Up Extortion Firm

An anonymous reader writes "The FTC has shut down D Squared, a company that's been spamming via the Windows Messenger Pop-Up Service. In some cases, ads would pop-up every 10 minutes, and only advertised a $30 product that disabled similar pop-up ads. The FTC is slamming the extortion gauntlet on them. Interestingly, the FTC only caught onto all this because one of their own commissioners was among those getting spammed."

Comments

I wonder what their email addresses are...

[delirium28]

Maybe we can get them to shut down the spammers next...

one of their own commissioners...

[Threni]

"Interestingly, the FTC only caught onto all this because one of their own commissioners was among those getting spammed."

There's a lesson for us all, there.

Re:one of their own commissioners...

[tomhudson]

Yep, so much for government of the people, by the people, for the people. It's only when their self-interest gets nicked that they move their lardarses. Lets hope some of them lose money on $CO..

Not quite right.

[Delphix]

"POP-UP ADVERTISING is a fact of life," said Howard Beales, Director of the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection. "But one company has taken pop-ups beyond annoyance."

No it's not. I use Safari (Mac OS) and Mozilla (Linux/Windows) for all my web browsing. And I use Trillian, Gaim, or Fire for IM.

So no, POP-UP Advertising is deifnetly not a fact of life. It's just that too many people are unaware how easy it is to get away from.

Re:Not quite right.

[zymurgyboy]

The article is talking about exploiting the Windows Messenger service, not instant messenger or using equally irritating and far more common web browser based pop-up ads.

This would be more accurately classed as yet another stupid on-by-default, security-decreasing idiocy on the part of Microsoft. Why the OS would install with this on by default is a mystery to me.

I'm just glad MS didn't decide to remove it from future versions of the Windows. I've actually used this feature at work and found it quite useful.

For instance, I've had to sit in on training classes as few times that one of our vendors was putting on for some of our users. It was a fly-on-the-wall type thing; I was there to get feedback from our users, primarily.

A few times some configuration shortcomming became apparent and people would start wispering to each other. Rather than let it go and wreck the class, I quickly fixed the problems on each machine in the room and sent one of these messages to each PC in the room, telling them it was fixed.

I didn't have to stop the guest trainer, I didn't have walk over and stop anyone from paying attention to him, and I could I easily communicate that the problem was identified and resolved. It was sort of cool.

Normally I would have just e-mailed them, but we don't have users use their accounts in training, none of the training accounts have mailboxes.

That's how it should be used, I think. Too bad the FTC doesn't take as much interest in browser pop-up advertisers. I've seen IE popup ads for this crap. Which appears to be similar in concept only the delivery is through a different pop-up. The product/service looks just about as useless. You could accomplish everything they're trying sell you on with add/remove programs and dumping IE for a browser that deoesn't subject you to this type of torture.

Thats what we get for tolerating advertisements

[Accord MT]

Shame on us! We are intruded upon every day and no one complains. Hour by hour, our eyes and ears are bombarded with advertisements, but we accept it all as a fact of life. Why do we allow this tresspass into our daily lives? Why is it considered acceptable to allow companies to push products in our faces every second of every day? Why don't we have laws against advertising?

If someone dumps raw sewage in the streets, the cops will take them away. If someone plays their boom-box too loud in my neighborhood, they will eventually be fined. So why do we allow billboards, huge store signs, and ads on cars, busses, and park benches to pollute our visual environment?

I should be able to go for a walk or ride my bike outside without having to endure constant sales pitches, without having huge logos and brand names all over the place. Don't you agree? Is some corporation's desire to sell a product really more important than our desire of a peaceful environment?

If I stood outside your house all day shouting "Buy My Product!!!" over and over you'd get kind of angry wouldn't you? So why don't you get angry when corporations do the same thing via huge billboards? What exactly is the difference?

Re:Thats what we get for tolerating advertisements

[kfg]

. . .ride my bike outside without having to endure constant sales pitches, without having huge logos and brand names all over the place.

Actually, this is a pretty good description of the appearance of most of the bike riders I see these days.

KFG

Re:Thats what we get for tolerating advertisements

[dillon_rinker]

What exactly is the difference?
1. Humans have free speech
2. Corporations are legally human
3. ???
4. PROFIT! (Seriously. If you can declare a personal income of several billion a year, YOU TOO can engage in free speech.)

Re:Thats what we get for tolerating advertisements

[Quasar1999]

Your argument is flawed. I am not forced to look at ads on billboards, or even tv... I am forced to listen to you yelling buy my product, and a boombox, etc...

The difference with pop-up ads, is they are unwanted, and cannot be ignored... If I go to a website with pop-ups, and I don't like them, I can never come back... but with this pop-up advertising, they were there, without any action on my part, and directly interrupted me.

Re:Thats what we get for tolerating advertisements

[jazman_777]

What exactly is the difference?

Billboards are not a violation of anyone's property rights. They may be an aesthetic offense, but that is what life in the USA is all about these days, is it not? Looking like a slob is one of our fundamental rights.

Re:Thats what we get for tolerating advertisements

[fmaxwell]

Shame on us! We are intruded upon every day and no one complains. Hour by hour, our eyes and ears are bombarded with advertisements, but we accept it all as a fact of life.

The key difference here is that you paid for your PC and no advertiser, whether a spammer or a pop-up advertiser, has a right to steal your bandwidth or storage.

Don't like ads while listening to the radio? Then pay for satellite radio and listen to ad-free stations. Don't like ads during movies you view on TV? Then watch the movies on pay-per-view. But it's idiotic to watch a television station to which you send no money and then get mad that they show ads. Of course they show ads! It's how they finance the operation of their television station.

If you don't like a billboard, then buy the property on which it is located and tear down the billboard. But you are hard-pressed to claim that the billboard interfered with your work or cost you money.

Re:Thats what we get for tolerating advertisements

[letxa2000]

If you don't like a billboard, then buy the property on which it is located and tear down the billboard. But you are hard-pressed to claim that the billboard interfered with your work or cost you money.

It's funny seeing people not complain about billboards or saying that they are ok. These are people that haven't lived in a BBRE (BillBoard Rich Environment).

As I said elsewhere in this thread, move to Mexico for awhile. There are days I literally feel claustrophobic because of the saturation of the skyline (at all levels... ground level, 30 feet, 100 fet) with advertisements. Yes, I tune them out. You HAVE to tune them out. They've gone past the point of "they don't notice it but will remember it subconsciously." There are so many that they are just a blur of color as you drive by... They're on corners, on tops of residential and commercial rooftops, on stand-alone supports that some business decided to mount in the middle of their microscopic parking lot, painted on brick walls, hanging from or mounted above pedestrian bridges, overpasses--and most of them are at least partially blocked by other billboards anyway. It's like being in Time Square but without the general coolness and flashing lights that makes Time Square cool rather than an advertising eyesore.

Really... It's something I think every politician in the U.S. should have as part of their "initiation" or "orientation." Live in Mexico for a week and truly observe how bad advertising can be if not carefully checked.

I'm not sure if there's less advertising in the U.S. than in Mexico because advertisers intentionally don't want to saturate to this level and numb everyone completely or because the local governments *DO* have a decent level of restriction that prevents it from getting this bad.

AOL reconfigures your system... ok, fine

[RobertB-DC]

You know, when I saw in the article that AOL was automatically turning off users' Messenger Service, I wondered if that was stepping over the line. After all, we Slashdotters *hate* it when someone messes with our configuration without our permission!

Then, I read the process, and remembered doing the same thing to turn off the oh-so-obvious "Your print job is complete" messages from the laser printer in the next cube. It would be so easy for a non-geek to either screw up or freeze like a deer in the headlights:

Beales recommends that current Windows users manually shut the service off to protect themselves from unwanted pop-ups.
To disable Messenger:
* Click Start, and then click Control Panel (or point to Settings, and then click Control Panel).
* Double-click Administrative Tools.
* Double-click Services.
* Double-click Messenger.
* In the Startup type list, click Disabled. Click Stop, and then click OK.

Not to stereotype AOLers, but considering what their tech support would face if newbies were given those instructions, I think they did the right thing to shut off a service that nobody uses anyway.

I'm trying to think of why the Messenger Service was a good thing in the first place. I recall way back before Win95, we used to prank each other with dire "system messages". Was that all it was ever good for?

Re:AOL reconfigures your system... ok, fine

[TopShelf]

The merits of Messenger Service may be debatable, but the fact that it is activated by default in Windows installs is downright absurd...

These are annoying

[Pingular]

The popups are annoying, but they can easily be blocked by installing Zonealarm, or any other good firewall.

Re:These are annoying

[Pingular]

The incorrect link was a typo, anyone reading the link would be able to go to the right address themselves. If you think you should disable the messenger service instead (although this would still leave you open to attacks from hackers, and I strongly recommend the use of a decent firewall aswell) the following steps can be taken:

Windows 2000

1. Click Start-> Settings-> Control Panel-> Administrative Tools->Services
2. Scroll down and highlight "Messenger"
3. Right-click the highlighted line and choose Properties.
4. Click the STOP button.
5. Select Disable or Manual in the Startup Type scroll bar
6. Click OK

Windows XP Home

1. Click Start->Settings ->Control Panel
2. Click Performance and Maintenance
3. Click Administrative Tools
4. Double click Services Scroll
5. down and highlight "Messenger"
6. Right-click the highlighted line and choose Properties.
7. Click the STOP button.
8. Select Disable or Manual in the Startup Type scroll bar
9. Click OK

Windows XP Professional

1. Click Start->Settings ->Control Panel
2. Click Administrative Tools
3. Click Services
4. Double click Services Scroll
5. down and highlight "Messenger"
6. Right-click the highlighted line and choose Properties.
7. Click the STOP button.
8. Select Disable or Manual in the Startup Type scroll bar
9. Click OK

Windows NT

1. Click Start ->Control Panel
2. Double Click Administrative Tools
3. Select Services-> Double-click on Messenger
4. In the Messenger Properties window, select Stop,
5. Then choose Disable as the Startup Type
6. Click OK

In all other versions of windows the service cannot be disabled.

Full FTC press release

[John3]

is here.

Targets

[rf0]

Well this is like the story a few days ago about an FBI agent who was spammed about a credit card scam and got the women arrested. Prehaps things like the FTC should have one individual who they try to get on every mailing list / get target by spammers. Least that way something could be done

Rus

No, it does not

[wowbagger]

This is not about Javascript pop-up ads, this is about the Windows Messenger service, which is a service that listens to a different port, and will pop up a dialog box when it receives a message from the wire.

This is similar to the service that Novell used to have, and the purpose is for local sysadmins to send out messages like "Server going down in 5 minutes, save your work and log out".

You could have your browser closed, and be doing nothing, and these will still come through.

Now, why the HELL do ISPs allow these packets on the wire, as they are a LAN service only, is beyond me (no, it is not - I understand all too well the stupidity and laziness of most ISPs).

Re:No, it does not

[stratjakt]

We use them over the 'net all the time, we just have our firewall allow only from trusted sites.

The NET family of commands are more useful than just popup messages.

It's not up to the ISP to block ANYTHING. What's inside those TCP or UDP packets is none of their fucking business.

2 billion.. hmmm

[nyet]

"On its Web site, the firm said the software could beam 135,000 pop-up ads at consumers every hour, and claimed to have a database of over two billion Internet addresses, according to the FTC."

2^32, minus subnets and netmasks, minus 10, 127, 192.168, etc...

Okay...

[Saint Aardvark]

"But the firm now says Windows Messenger probably isn't necessary for home users, and future versions of its Windows software will come with the service turned off."

I gotta know. Who ported cluestick to Windows? :-)

Re:It's a temporary restraining order....

[ERJ]

Not Redmond disciples...all software developers.

No offense, but I don't want to be partially responsible when someone abuses something I have written. Sure, you will say, "write better software" but the thing is, even perfectly written software, when used for something it was not designed for, can have bad effects. Should we blaim the person who wrote ping if it is used in some sort of denial of service attack?

Not until it bothers me...

[zbowling]

I posted this on an ASK Slashdot a while back.
::History::

Its funny how the goverment doesn't seem to care until they get experience it for them selves? That fast against the messanger pop up stuff.

Wooooo..

How long will it take until they can't stand spam in their email and they decided to finally decide to take care of it. How about all of us legimate email users get together and spam the FCC and maybe we can piss them off anough to do something about it.

What took so long?

[thedillybar]

This is ridiculous. I understand why it's difficult to block spam: the sender makes an effort to be anonymous and unknown. They aren't recognized as legitimate companies and many of them are overseas and not subject to many laws.

Read the title. "FTC Shuts Down Pop-Up Extortion Firm" This is a firm in the United States with one heck of a business model. If what they're doing isn't illegal, it needs to be. The idea that a company could do this for so long and scam so many people certainly doesn't prove the effectiveness of our system to me. Something needs to change.

I hope we all do some research and think twice the next time we hit the polls. Matters like these are the responsibility of many various lawmakers. Let's hope they can earn all those figures and get some work done at the same time. Sure it's difficult, but suck it up for once.

I wrote this really amusing application a time ago

[Eudial]

I wrote this really amusing application a time ago, it listened to the ports used for MS win msg, and if it received a valid message, it replied once every 5 seconds, 600 times with the same message + the text "\nQuit spamming ffs!". Quite efficient.

Why? Well, my son is a student at a computer college, and he was sickin tired of people thinking that broadcasting MS windows messenger popus was fun, so he asked me for a tool to repent the spammers.

M$ has changed their tune

[El]

Last time I checked, I seem to recall they said "You really shouldn't disable Windows Messenger; buy a firewall instead." (Followed by instructions on how to disable.) Now they seem to be admitting it wasn't necessary in the first place here

Microsoft gets no blame

[t_allardyce]

An entire business set up on the basis that Microsoft leaves this stupid thing turned on. They get caught, (and yes the burgler is still responsible even if the door is left open) and Microsoft gets absolutely nothing, no "you should be more careful leaving un-needed services like that on by default it just encourages them" no bad press coverage about how all these things (pop up windows, pop-up messages, VB viri) could have been prevented if microsoft had changed 1 line of code.

My Favorite part...

[ePhil_One]

On its Web site, the firm said the software could beam 135,000 pop-up ads at consumers every hour, and claimed to have a database of over two billion Internet addresses, according to the FTC

If any wants, I can sell them a copy of that database for just $25,000. A brief sample to show I have the goods:

192.168.0.1
192.168.0.2
192.168.0.3
192.168.0.4

Re:My Favorite part...

[(H)elix1]

If any wants, I can sell them a copy of that database for just $25,000. A brief sample to show I have the goods:

192.168.0.1
192.168.0.2
192.168.0.3
192.168.0 .4

{Dark Helmet voice}
192.168.0.1-2-3-4-5 -- what a coincidence, I have that combination on my network.
{/Dark Helmet voice}

Windows: Google toolbar

[lostindenver]

I use the Google tool bar and it stop 99% of all pop ups. It also is site by site configurable so I can have usefull pop ups on some sites