Slashdot Mirror


Feds Thwart Extortion Plot Against Best Buy

hiero writes "From an article in the Star Tribune: 'Federal authorities said Tuesday they thwarted an extortion plot against Best Buy Co. Inc. by a man who sent the company an e-mail threatening to expose what he claimed were weaknesses in the retailer's computer system unless he was paid $2.5 million.' What's really interesting to me, though, is this paragraph further on in the article: 'The federal search warrant was obtained the morning of Oct. 24 and allowed the FBI, with Best Buy's cooperation, to use an Internet device known as an Internet Protocol Address Verifier. It contained a program that automatically sent back a response to Best Buy after the company sent a message to the e-mail address. The response allowed investigators to identify Ray as the sender of the e-mail threats, according to the government.' Internet Protocol Address Verifier? Is this Carnivore in action?"

72 of 942 comments (clear)

  1. I think... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I think it's called a return receipt :-D Probably was using Outlook which automagicly sends one when requested.

    Blogzine

    1. Re:I think... by 1u3hr · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Sorry but no is doesn't, I use outlook at work and i have to allow mine to return a reciept, if i cancel the request nothing is returned to the sender

      But if you reeive an HTML message that includes an IMG link to the senders' site, when Outlook displays the image (even if it's an invisble 1 pixel one) they have your IP. There are ways to block this, but it's on by default. Spammers use this to verify your address.

    2. Re:I think... by isorox · · Score: 5, Funny

      I do wonder about the sanity of our boss, who sends an all-employee email out (5 in the last two months) with a read receipt request. IIRC there's somewhere in the region of 20,000 employees.

    3. Re:I think... by EddWo · · Score: 4, Informative

      Exactly. But Outlook 2003 doesn't display images in HTML emails by default, nor will Outlook Express after XP SP2.
      If you want to see the images you have to request them to be downloaded, or add the sender to your list of trusted sites.

      --
      "Taligent is still pure vapor. Maybe they'll be the last who jumps up on Openstep... "
    4. Re:I think... by schon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What if his ISP uses a webcache or webproxy? The feds wouldn't get much info out of that.?

      Why not?

      They'd get just as much information from the IP address of his ISP's web server as they would from his actual IP address. (Hint: Your IP address does _not_ typically broadcast who you you are, it announces who your ISP is.)

      Even with the IP address of the user, they'd still have to subpoena the ISP to get the user account information - which the ISP would have to look up in their logs. If they got the IP address of the ISP's proxy, the ISP would simply look in the proxy logs first.

      Now, if the user was uing an off-shore open proxy (say in Asia somewhere) then they might have a problem.

      all new versions of outlook (including XP SP2d versions) will not serve up remote assets in HTML emails unless specifically instructed to do so.

      Well I guess that he wasn't using a new version of Outlook then.

    5. Re:I think... by thedillybar · · Score: 4, Funny
      Why does it have to be a 1 pixel transparent image? It might as well be a huge image that says "Dude, you're busted."

      By the time it starts loading, the damage is already done.

    6. Re:I think... by nahdude812 · · Score: 4, Funny
      /me takes a moment to hug his Thunderbird.

      Why, are you in the extortion business?

      Ye... oooh, nice try feds! Almost got me on that one!
    7. Re:I think... by Tmack · · Score: 4, Informative
      Though this trick will work for ANY html tag that accesses the external server. It doesnt have to be an image. It could be a style sheet, a simple link for the moron to click, or any element that requirs access to the server to get content. As soon as it access the server to load said content, that IP is logged. The only way to avoid it is simply to use an email browser that ONLY displays the email contents (raw), and wont load external content (without asking first). Just another reason I still use pine.

      Tm

      --
      Support TBI Research: http://www.raisinhope.org
    8. Re:I think... by Ian+Wolf · · Score: 4, Funny

      Some would say that if you bought Office 2003, you've already been scammed. :-)

      --
      "The words of the prophets are written on the Slashdot walls."
  2. No Wonder by PoitNarf · · Score: 5, Funny

    That's what happens when you try to extort a big company using Outlook.

    --

    "0101100101? It's just jibberish. *looks in mirror, gasps* 1010011010@!? AHHHHHH!!"
  3. IP Address Verifier == web bug by morzel · · Score: 5, Interesting
    "Internet Protocol Address Verifier? Is this Carnivore in action?"
    Methinks that would be marketing speak for an HTML mail with a web bug (1x1 transparent pixel image loaded from remote server). If the 'villain' is using a mail program that displays HTML, his IP address is logged.

    --
    Okay... I'll do the stupid things first, then you shy people follow.
    [Zappa]
    1. Re:IP Address Verifier == web bug by orthogonal · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Methinks that would be marketing speak for an HTML mail with a web bug

      That's my guess too. If so, had the extortionist had his mail client set up like mine, he wouldn't have had his IP "verified".

      My client, actually, is the (rightfully) much maligned Microsoft Outlook, but I don't have a problem with web bugs, because my firewall only allows Outlook to connect to one address -- my domain's mail server -- and only to two ports at that address, ports 110 and 25.

      This means no web bugs or any referenced (as opposed to inlined) images are ever displayed. In the few cases where I actually want to see referenced images, this is a minor inconvenience, but it's more than offset by knowing that no spammer -- or corporation -- ever gets verification of my email address.

      For most mail, of course, it's not an issue. Important email rarely if ever contains referenced images; indeed I discourage anyone from sending me HTML-encoded email at all.

      And if I want to view a url included in an email, I just click on it, and Firebird (which is allowed to connect to any address, so long as it's to port 80) displays the url. If I really want to see an email in its full glory (and I never do), I can always save it and then open it in Firebird.

    2. Re:IP Address Verifier == web bug by DrSkwid · · Score: 5, Insightful

      >if this is the case then this simply re-enforces my belief that criminals are some of the stupidest on the planet.

      clever criminals don't get caught so you don't hear about them

      FBI Files and COPS tend not to show you cases where the perpetrator outwitted the victims *and* the police *and* the FBI.

      --
      There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
    3. Re:IP Address Verifier == web bug by Safety+Cap · · Score: 4, Informative
      ~ I don't have a problem with web bugs, because my firewall only allows Outlook to connect to one address ~.
      Does your firewall only allow IE to connect to one address? When you view a message under Outlook, it uses IE to render the page.
      --
      Yeah, right.
    4. Re:IP Address Verifier == web bug by Milalwi · · Score: 4, Interesting

      clever criminals don't get caught so you don't hear about them

      Indeed. A few years ago, I was talking to a friend of mine who was a county prosecutor about a case which had happened in my end of town.

      A woman had her daughter's boyfriend murder her husband for the insurance money. I was amazed that she thought the authorities wouldn't figure it out. My friend said(paraphrasing): "They're mean and they're stupid. You have no idea how mean and how stupid... The smart ones don't get caught."

      Of course, most of criminals *think* they're smart enough to get away with their crimes. But as researchers have found, they probably don't know they're not smart enough to avoid being caught.

      Milalwi
  4. Hmmmm... by graveyardduckx · · Score: 4, Insightful

    and this is where he's going to say his computer was hi-jacked, right? Even Carnibore has its limitations.

    1. Re: Hmmmm... by dipipanone · · Score: 4, Insightful

      However, a friend in a position to know tells me that the typical criminal is incredibly stupid.

      I presume that your friend is referring to the typical criminal who is regularly apprehended? Unless he's actively involved with successful criminals, how would he know how stupid or otherwise they actually are?

      This is one of the things that makes me laugh about law enforcement. When you hear them being interviewed on Cops or some such rubbish, they're always going on about how dumb these losers are -- not realizing that it's only that group who are dumber than they are able to catch. Epidemiologists refer to it as the clinician's bias. Because doctors only see sick people, they assume everyone is sick.

      When they want more resources or additional powers though, they go on at great length about how cunning and sophisticated modern criminal organizations are, and how these new measures are essential to capture them and make the world safe for mom and apple pie.

      The truth is that criminals are just like the regular population. Some are smart, some are dumb and some are just average.

  5. Just a little "bug" in the mail, silly wabbit by Kwelstr · · Score: 5, Informative

    Easy does it. You don't need a big surveillance program, just add a bug to your email that "grabs" the reader's IP addy and voila!

    Easy does it, apply the KISS principle to life.

    --


    ~~~Please pass the salt, I hate unsalted MD5s :-/
    1. Re:Just a little "bug" in the mail, silly wabbit by wljones · · Score: 5, Informative

      Go to http://www.grc.com . It will probably give back the IP address of the caller along with an explanation of how anyone can do this. Steve Gibson goes on to say that anonymity is not easy on the Internet, and assuming your messages are anonymous is foolish.

    2. Re:Just a little "bug" in the mail, silly wabbit by cayenne8 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Geez...what a pin head. Why didn't he just set up a nym account. Email bounces around the world a few times, with headers stripped on every bounce. Virtually untraceable. Heck, at the end, he doesn't even have to recieve the email back. Just have the last encrypted message posted to a USENET group for anonymous messages....pretty much impossible to ferret out, and only he could decrypt it.

      The guy was smart enough to try to break the site, and he couldn't figure how to get/send email without being traced??? And why would he use anything but plain text email either? And probably using Outlook? He was asking for it...

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    3. Re:Just a little "bug" in the mail, silly wabbit by insensitive+claude · · Score: 4, Insightful
      This isn't the only corporation that "Jamie Weathersby" threatened... yet, I don't know of a single threat that was sucessfully carried out.

      Uh, yeah... The ones who do pay off blackmailers (and it does happen) don't generally advertise it. When a corporation is successfully extorted, it tends to stop there, unless the bastards ask for a second ransom.

  6. Internet Protocol Address Verifier ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    sounds so much better than "ping"

  7. Well, ironic isn't it? by metlin · · Score: 5, Interesting

    One one hand, if a genuine white hat hacker finds an exploit in a network and told the owners about it, s/he finds himself ostracized for the actions, and is threatened with legalities.

    And on the other hand, what this guy tried to do was establish a "business relationship" -- notice that he did try to contact them first with the offer to help them:

    The e-mail also offered to establish an unspecified business relationship between the sender and Best Buy, adding: "Without your response, we are obligated to share the security hole with the public for their protection. As a result, Best Buy may experience a loss in business, thefts and lawsuits."

    Ofcourse, once he noticed he wasn't getting anywhere, he decided to resort to good ole' blackmail.

    Honestly, this was bound to happen some day or the other. When legitimate security people point out bugs and holes, they get treated like scum and are threatened with law suits. So whats the best thing to to? Threaten the companies with money. Even if 0.1% of the companies gave in, it still is a way of making money.

    Good, atleast this way companies will be more careful about protecting data.

    1. Re:Well, ironic isn't it? by tuxette · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Honestly, this was bound to happen some day or the other.

      I think it's happening more often than what we read about in the mainstream press. Most businesses want to keep things hush-hush as to not generate bad publicity.

      Good, atleast this way companies will be more careful about protecting data.

      I doubt it, although I tend to be a pessimist when it comes to these matters. As long as they can hide behind lawsuits, it will be business as usual.

      My final note of pessimism: things are going to get much worse before they get better. Brace yourselves!

      --
      People say I'm crazy, I got diamonds on the soles of my shoes...
    2. Re:Well, ironic isn't it? by UnknowingFool · · Score: 5, Insightful
      When legitimate security people point out bugs and holes, they get treated like scum and are threatened with law suits. So whats the best thing to to? Threaten the companies with money. Even if 0.1% of the companies gave in, it still is a way of making money

      Although the article is not very detailed in this aspect, his actions do not speak of someone trying to help BestBuy. Some of the info is not released due to security concerns and pending litigation but this seems more like a black mail scheme more than anything else. If he was serious about helping BestBuy, asking for money ($2.5 million) sent the wrong message because the mafia also used terms like "business relationship" and "offer they can't refuse" when shaking down people as well. Until we know more, all we know is that he said enough in his emails that BestBuy and government thought he was threatening.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    3. Re:Well, ironic isn't it? by mumblestheclown · · Score: 4, Insightful
      When legitimate security people point out bugs and holes, they get treated like scum and are threatened with law suits. So whats the best thing to to?

      Do nothing and MYOB. If companies lose substantial amounts of money because of lax security, then they will do one of two things:

      • improve their security / invest more in security
      • go out of business and/or be less competitive.
      in either case, the consumer wins (as in case 2, more competitive companies will spring up to take their place).

      If, as it turns out, that external security consultants are the way to go, then such companies will engage in a business relationship with one of dozens if not hundreds of world class security firms.

      What we don't need is whiny "independent security researchers" doing what amounts to unprofessonal blackmail attempts ("let's establish a 'business relationship' or I spill the beans.) Computer tresspass is computer tresspass. We don't need to revise trespass laws to improve security - we need companies to go to legitimate security firms and use their tiger team services and so on.

    4. Re:Well, ironic isn't it? by the_mad_poster · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Computer trespass is computer trespass.

      I'm so sick of this crap, I don't even know where to begin.

      Best Buy is NOT the entire Internet. Best Buy's security problems could potentially be used to inconvenience or incapacitate innocent sites nearby or, even, innocent sites with no connection to Best Buy whatsoever. Best Buy has a responsibility to fix their security problems when they're made known. If Best Buy's lumbering managerial morons see fit to ignore contacts and help offers, there is nothing wrong with exposing Best Buy's problems to force their hand (blackmailing them is a totally different story).

      This ridiculous attitude with these clueless businesses is tantamount to politely telling someone their fly is unzipped and getting your nose punched in gratitude (as the person continues to wander around with the fly unzipped, punching people who are trying to help them). If you find a security problem, you let them know about it. If they ignore you, you let everyone else know about it to force their hand. It's not like if someone who's looking to cause trouble right off the bat is going to give a warning shot over the bough and let them prepare. Hmmm... say I'm poking around a form on a popular retailer's website and accidentally type in a "funny character" and submit it. What's this? SQL error? Oh? I guess I should just keep my mouth shut, right? I shouldn't bother to try and report this glaring vulnerability? After all, I have no obligation to their customers, and, since I have no moral compass at all, I shouldn't even think of those poor, trusting fools, right? Give me a break...

      ...we need companies to go to legitimate security firms and use their tiger team services and so on.

      You're a real riot. Are you on one of these "tiger teams", perchance? Mad because all your training doesn't amount to a hill of beans more than someone with a lot of book reading and practice and they're stealing your business by giving out free advice? Or do you just not know what you're talking about? I assume that you believe these "tiger teams" are infallible and could never make a mistake? I guess that once someone goes to a security firm, there's no possible way someone could miss something or something could change after the audit and review? I guess the "tiger team" couldn't possibly have someone on it that has, for some reason, not been acutely focused on the task at hand due to illness, fatigue, personal issues, etc.? I guess this "tiger team" has experienced every possible security problem there will ever be and has taken steps to eliminate all of them forever and there's no possible way a hole will ever be found that they didn't already psychically perceive and patch?

      in either case, the consumer wins

      I guess the consumer wins when their credit card number, name, and address get stolen too, right? I know that last time MY credit card number got stolen thanks to an utterly stupid retailer, I was REAL pleased about it. In fact, give me your address, I'll mail you all my credit cards and photo id because it's so great when people get them that shouldn't have them.

      Here's your passport, sir. Welcome to the real world. Please do try to fit in in some capacity. A good step would be to stop suggesting that knocking the lock off someone's door and walking into an unprotected computer system are the same thing. People who actively break secured systems without invitation are one thing, people reporting obvious flaws or a total lack of security in general are another. Stop lumping them altogther as "computer trespass".

      --
      Alito: A vote for Alito is a punch in the eye to put that bitch back in her place!
  8. Internet Protocol Address Verifier? Pfft... by eaglebtc · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Hmm, sounds like a fancy name for a computer expert. All you have to do is read the SMTP headers in most email and it will reveal the sender's IP. Just trace it back down the line of servers through which the email was routed, and you get back to the original IP address.

    If the sender is spoofing headers, however, this becomes more difficult. Why not just subpoena the ISP for their email data? Doesn't the server keep a log of what IP addresses sent which pieces of email?

    For example:

    Received: from [65.119.30.157] (helo=SMTP.magnellmail.net)
    by snoopy-bak.runbox.com with smtp (Exim 4.24)
    id 1Ae9TJ-0006F6-B0
    for xxxxxxxx@runbox.com; Wed, 07 Jan 2004 09:55:25 +0100
    Received: from mail pickup service by E1SSL2 with Microsoft SMTPSVC;
    Wed, 7 Jan 2004 00:56:48 -0800

    The above shows that someone at 65.119.30.157 sent this email. It went through their mail server (magnellmail.net) to runbox, my provider. From there, Runbox directed it to my Inbox when I opened Outlook.

    There is also a very unique message ID at the end of the headers section:

    Message-ID: [E1SSL23ZpEVmkWFBXZG000011b9@E1SSL2]

    Could this be used by the Email provider to find out who sent emails, if the IP address is missing or spoofed?

    --
    Homestarrunner.net -- It's Dot Com!
    1. Re:Internet Protocol Address Verifier? Pfft... by ComaVN · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They tracked mail sent to the address, not received from it.

      --
      Be wary of any facts that confirm your opinion.
    2. Re:Internet Protocol Address Verifier? Pfft... by Lumpy · · Score: 4, Informative

      no, you are dead wrong.

      I can send you an email right now that will only get you to that mail server's address. there is no way in hell you can get my IP addrees out of it. and then if you try and suponea that company there is no real information in there about me except one IP address that lead's to a http anynomizer... so now you have to suponea that and hope I didnt do a second hop and was stupid enough to use the first two inside a country that will gladly bend over for your government.

      your tactic was useful 10 years ago... today it's mostly useless.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    3. Re:Internet Protocol Address Verifier? Pfft... by ryanvm · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I have a better idea. Wardrive for 15 minutes downtown until you have a 100% anonymous IP address. Good luck tracking that down.

  9. Where is the line to be drawn? by etymxris · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Is it when he offered a "business relation" in exchange for fixing the problem? Or was it when he threatened to disclose the flaw? Or was it merely because he wanted money in return?

    Had he just disclosed the flaw, would he more or less a criminal, ethically and legally speaking? It seems that worse would have come if he had simply published the flaw right away.

    Was he justified in asking for compensation for his findings? If not, this seems to obligate us to "work for free" when discovering such a security problem.

    What do others here think?

  10. suit talk by broothal · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is just a case of bad journalism. Of course, there are many methods of getting the IP of the receiver of an email The most common is a webbug (a link to an image on a server you control), but that requires for the culprit to use a mail client that renders HTML.

    "Internet Protocol Address Verifyer" sounds like something you'd find in a Movie OS. Of course, like all other buzz words, the name is not related to the alledged function.

    They either used a webbug, og checked the IP in the header of the mail he sent with his claim.

  11. Carnivore? More like overreaction by bwalling · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They got a warrant BEFORE they used the program. Whatever the program did - read information from his PC or just return IP address - it was a valid, legal search. We should be considering this a victory for our rights. The only way I can see anyone complaining about this is if the warrant was improperly obtained, but it seems entirely reasonable to "search" the email address that has been attempting blackmail.

  12. I doubt they have anything as fancy as a IPAV by Bruce+J+L · · Score: 4, Insightful

    They probably just read the mail headers as soon as he replied to the letter they sent him. From this and the time the email was sent they probably had no trouble asking his isp for the user information. Criminals are not always the smartest apples and he probably didnt even have a way to crack the website.

    If he wasnt clueless he would have used a dummy email account and checked it via rental computer or at the very least a dial up account using *69 ( which can still leave your number ) and a prepaid credit card / gift card.

    This guy reminds me of the old irc script kiddies who would do things from their house and wonder how they were tracked down. While anonomyzers are available it makes me wonder if he,

    a. used one
    b. had used a computer before

    As to the FBI ip verifier i find it hard to believe they have anything more advanced then the current jscript / asp / log parsers to pull ip information.

    AFIK the absolute most a email address can yeild is the ip of the server. However with the email headers im sure you can get a ip without too much trouble with a warrant.

    --
    Karma's over rated. Speak your mind.
  13. Note to extortionists... by Black+Parrot · · Score: 4, Funny


    Make sure you turn off Message Disposition Notification in your e-mail client.

    --
    Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
  14. Web bug (Handy for job application e-mails) by SomethingOrOther · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Internet Protocol Address Verifier? Is this Carnivore in action?"

    That'll be a tiny 1x1 pixel gif embeded in a HTML e-mail called from the feds server.(AKA web bug... You cant turn off HTML in M$ LookOut and this dude dosent sound very clued up)

    Presto, the feds know who opend the mail how long they looked at it etc etc etc.

    A top tip (tm) is to embed a web bug in a job aplication e-mail. Its interseting to watch your aplication being pushed around various departments and see who actually reads it.

    --
    Anyone quoted by a reporter knows how little they understand
    Don't believe what you read is the truth.
  15. What carnivore does. by Chrysophrase · · Score: 5, Informative

    Over here there is a Congressional Statement of what Carnivor "officialy" does, or is "allowed" to do. One paragraph of this statement:

    Carnivore is a very effective and discriminating special purpose electronic surveillance system. Carnivore is a filtering tool which the FBI has developed to carefully, precisely, and lawfully conduct electronic surveillance of electronic communications occurring over computer networks. In particular, it enables the FBI, in compliance with the Constitution and the Federal electronic surveillance laws, to properly conduct both full communications' content interceptions and pen register and trap and trace investigations to acquire addressing information.

    gives us the gist of it. So yes this very well be Carnivore in action.

    --
    "It usualy starts with some screaming. Afterwards there is much running around."
  16. Google appears to be stumped too by chronus22 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is the first time google has heard about it as well, apparently.

  17. Concerns about Best Buy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm much more concerned that their cash registers use WiFi without a lick of encryption... I read several stories a while back about people sitting out in the parking lot with sniffers, capturing credit card information...

  18. Re:U.S. government surveillance by orthogonal · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Somehow, this power accumulation and surveilance (sic) reminds me of Senator Palpatine. I just hope I'm wrong.

    Huh. It reminded me of Stalin and Beria and the NKVD, but you're right, better we should take our lessons from space opera than from history.

    George Lucas's fertile imagination is so much more convincing than those ponderous, dusty history books. And you can't eat popcorn and jujubes while reading books, it gets the pages too sticky.

  19. Re:Web bug (Handy for job application e-mails) by mosschops · · Score: 5, Informative

    You cant turn off HTML in M$ LookOut

    Oh yes you can - something I rely on to avoid spammers using the same trick!

    this dude dosent sound very clued up

    My thought exactly ;-)

  20. Re:Web bug (Handy for job application e-mails) by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 5, Funny

    A top tip (tm) is to embed a web bug in a job aplication e-mail. Its interseting to watch your aplication being pushed around various departments and see who actually reads it.

    Yes, it's very interesting. For example, here's the log of all the machines who accessed my web bug when applied for a job at the DHS:

    frontdesk.dhs.gov
    hr.dhs.gov
    check.dhs.gov
    ch eck.ins.gov
    check.irs.org
    it.dhs.org
    counterter rorism.dhs.org
    legal.dhs.org
    submitsubpoena.aol. com
    bust.usmarshals.gov

    brb 2 secs, someone's at the door...

    --
    "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
  21. Thier flaws have been published before by wathead · · Score: 4, Informative

    Anyone that reads 666 otherwise known as the hacker quarterly knows about all the problems in Best Buys network.
    It even goes in depth on how to get into thier private network from a display PC.
    How to find info on hiring and firing people etc.
    How to order stuff and have it sent.

  22. If he had used spammer techniques.. by Karl+Prince · · Score: 5, Informative
    would they have caught him

    and few other ways of hiding yourself, as below

    1. Dedicated firewalled Linux Laptop with WLAN, and changing MAC
    2. WarDrive around for a unsecure internet connection.
    3. Use proxies from unsecured PC's, lists available from DBL providers, or you Email server logs.
    4. Setup up a web mail account, and send business proposal.
    5. WarDrive to other access poiunt for continuing dialog
    6. Travel around a bit to avoid setting a Wardrive pattern

    I would think this would be very difficult to trace without social engineering

    --

    mailto:EatSpamAndDie@princeweb.com
  23. Re:Carnivore? More like overreaction by revmf · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yeah but since PATRIOT, everything is a valid search...

  24. Re:is carnivore bad? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Is this Carnivore in action?

    No, it isn't. Like another poster said, this is really just a web bug. Carnivore is a sophisticated system for parsing billions of e-mails and flagging interesting things like threats against the President for analysts to examine, but has nothing to do with validating return addresses or anything like that.

    The only way to actually know that someone is actually receiving your e-mail at a particular location is to include a web bug that reports their IP address back to you, by opening a socket connection directly to something on a server you own (e.g. an image). So either include an image in the e-mail which is requested from your server, or include a trojan that "phones home" when they run it.

    It works. Try it the next time you want to see who's really spamming you. Just send a web bug to whatever the response address is they want you to contact, (you know, for your Nigerian money-laundering instructions), and then examine your server logs carefully to find out where they really are in the world. Of course, you could also send them a backdoor if you wanted, instead of just a beacon, but I would never countenance such uncivilized behavior :)

  25. This doesn't make sense by kmeson · · Score: 5, Insightful
    We are to believe that this guy is savvy enough to spoof his email headers so that his email address can't be traced, but not smart enough to turn off receipt verification and HTML rendering in his email program.

    You have to realize that we are getting our information about this incident from a NEWSPAPER, which the very least reliable source for technical topics. Remember this clueless newspaper article?

    I'd say we know little about what actually happened here.

  26. What are you supposed to do? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    (Somewhat off-topic, but a related topic, honestly)

    About a month ago I discovered what could be deemed a weakness in a relatively popular online merchant's order status system, allowing anyone to view the order status for any order in the system just by changing an ID field in the URL. I often try changing such values in URLs like this for no real reason (a habit from designing my own web-based scripts), and I've never found an exploit until now.

    So with a simple perl script, it would be possible to download and parse the mailing address, shipping address, items ordered, amount paid, credit type (NOT credit card type or credit card number, thankfully) and other assorted information for any given order. After some brief checking, I determined there were over five million orders viewable in this manner, going back a few years.

    So what am I supposed to do? I have no interest in establishing a 'business relationship' with this online merchant, telling everyone how to do it seems like it would cause more harm than good, and I fear being ostracized or even litigated for 'hacking' if I tell the company, even if all I did was change a sequential, non-encrypted number in an URL.

    Or is the information accessible not a big deal to worry about?

  27. Wait until he actually received the payment ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Imagine his surprise when he received a $2.5 million Best Buy Gift Card in the mail. Doh!

  28. HTML bug by teddlesruss · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I imagine that yep, this person isn't savvy enough to not use html email, and they slipped a web bug into the email. Hell I'd try it just on the off chance, and it looks like it paid off for your Feds that time...

    I've had one case where a friend and I were writing a boobytrapped shell on a Linux box, to use as the login shell for a suspected system cracker, and he logged in, saw the new shell (which we hadn't quite installed yet) and RAN THE BLOODY THING FOR US! We got all the data we needed to track him down right there and then, phoned his ISP and got him shut off on the spot.

    So - yes, even the more savvy often do really really stupid things...

    --
    -- ted russ http://www.arach.net.au/~ted/mydynes/ http://www.arach.net.au/~ted/myblogs/
  29. Re:Webmail by tunah · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Uh, the likelihood is that it was a web bug, in which case webmail won't help - the request comes from your browser, and thus IP. In fact, webmail makes it worse, because a lot of email software can disable web bugs or can't display them to begin with, web browsers don't tend to disable loading remote images ;-)

    --
    Free Java games for your phone: Tontie, Sokoban
  30. Please Think Before Exposing Paranoia by reallocate · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is not surveillance. This is just identifying the IP address of the recipient of email. Seems to me that's rather similar to using ping or whois. IP addresses and domain registrations are public, not private.

    It's also rather similar to your local mail carrier knowing where you live. Is that surveillance, too, or are you simply paranoid?

    If Best Buy had received the same threat via snail mail, and the FBI looked at the return address on the envelope, would you be screaming about surveillance?

    The Internet is not some mystical land that exists apart from reality and the law, contrary to the constant stream of silly /. posts that sxeem to believe otherwise. Get over it. The Internet is not special and people don't get a free pass because they use it for criminal behavior.

    Next time, please think bekore exposing yourself as a paranoid llon, OK?

    --
    -- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
    1. Re:Please Think Before Exposing Paranoia by Glamdrlng · · Score: 5, Informative

      I disagree. If a private citizen were being extorted for 2.5 mil, the feds would be willing to get involved. It's when the script kiddy down the street is extorting the local cyber cafe for free coffee that the feds won't touch it. Last I checked, the loss had to be above $5000 for the feds to investigate computer crime. That was a couple years ago though, don't know what it is now.

      --

      Yes, my only tool is a hammer. And you're starting to look like a nail.
    2. Re:Please Think Before Exposing Paranoia by I8TheWorm · · Score: 5, Informative

      $5000 is still the low cutoff for felony theft... anything below is a misdimeanor and gets handled at the local level.

      --
      Saying Android is a family of phones is akin to saying Linux is a family of PCs.
    3. Re:Please Think Before Exposing Paranoia by __aagmrb7289 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Oh no! The FBI doesn't want to investigate little Jimmy being extorted for his lunch money on the playground at school? What is this world coming to?

      This example of the counter-"point" is brought to you by the citizens for people thinking first before typing. Thank you.

  31. Re:U.S. government surveillance by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Somehow, this power accumulation and surveilance (sic) reminds me of Senator Palpatine. I just hope I'm wrong.

    Huh. It reminded me of Stalin and Beria and the NKVD, but you're right, better we should take our lessons from space opera than from history.

    In Imperial Coruscant, history takes lessons from YOU!

  32. If you break in to someone's system by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 4, Insightful

    without their permissions you are a criminal, both legally and morally. My stuff is my stuff and I'll thanky ou to keep your hands off it. If you wish to audit anyhting I have, physical or virtual, you'd better ask my permission first, or you'll face consequences.

    This seems perfectly reasonable and there is plenty of precident in the physical world:

    My house has many known security flaws. The largest would be the windows. They are easily broken with just a rock, allowing access. My door would also be a flaw, it's solid, but nothing a battering ram in experienced hands couldn't break down in a few minutes. My lock is aslo a flaw. IT's better than most, a high security lock that is much harder to pick than normal, but it still is pickable.

    So, if someone breaks into my house and demands money to fix it, should I honour that? No, I'd by perfectly jsutified in holding them at gun point and calling the police to have them punished. Regardless of thier intent, it's MY house and you'd better not enter it without my permission.

    It is similar for computer systems. If I pay you to hack my stuff and report on it, great. YOu are providing a valuable service and I thank you. IF you break into my stuff without my permission, you are a criminal pure and simple.

    Also, demanding money ex post facto is something else we have a law against, it's called balckmail and is illegal.

    Look, if you want to find flaws in stuff, do it legally. Contact the owner and ask if you may hack them. If they say no, move on. IT is not your duty or right ot mess with their stuff without permission.

    1. Re:If you break in to someone's system by quonsar · · Score: 5, Funny
      My house has many known security flaws. The largest would be the windows.

      hey! just like my computer!

      </obligatory karma whoring>

  33. What he did is still illegal by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Look, if you have a peice of software and you hack it on your own systems and/or network, that it leagal. You then publish teh exploit, also legal. However if you come and hack MY network without my permission, that's NOT legal.

    People who illegally break into systems deserve no more respect or consideration than people who illegally break into houses. You have no right at all to enter or use other people's property without their permission. Don't pretend like because it is a computer system that makes it any better.

    IT's like lock picking. IF you want to learn to pick a lock and find out its venurabilities, go right ahead. But do it on a lock you own. But the lock in question and play with it. To go to someone else's house and try on their lock without permission is illegal and immoral. You've no right to mess with their property.

    So if you get asked/hired to test someone's security (physical or virtual), great. Do what you can and give them a report. If you have something you own (physical or virtual) and you discover a security flaw, great, make it known so a fix can be developed. But do NOT presume you have the right to invade the property of others. It doesn't matter if it is venurable or not, it's not yours so you keep out.

  34. However, a bug says: "you're being bugged" by turnstyle · · Score: 4, Interesting
    "You don't need a big surveillance program, just add a bug to your email"

    The problem with an embedded image bug is that if the recipient views the source of the email -- and presumably this alleged extorter is a techie -- it's easy to spot such a bug, and so there's a real risk that including a bug would tip him off to the investigation.

    So, it may be an HTML bug, but perhaps not...

    --
    Here's what I do: Bitty Browser & Andromeda
    1. Re:However, a bug says: "you're being bugged" by petard · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The problem with an embedded image bug is that if the recipient views the source of the email -- and presumably this alleged extorter is a techie -- it's easy to spot such a bug, and so there's a real risk that including a bug would tip him off to the investigation.

      Only when you're doing mass mailings. If it's targeted, it is indistinguishable from a standard image... e.g.

      http://corporate.bestbuy.com/images/corporatelog o. jpg

      could be a web bug if you only send that URL to one person. The reason it's more obvious in mass mailings is because they require a unique identifier to have something to map back to the email address such that they can verify the address as live.

      --
      .sig: file not found
  35. Re:is carnivore bad? by Sivaram_Velauthapill · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Obviously you have never lived in a country that kills its OWN citizens. Obviously you haven't heard of the totalitarian regimes in Germany, USSR, and USA's close friends Saudi Arabia and Egypt. Obviously you haven't heard of the damage done to civil rights activists in the 60's by the FBI and the CIA. Obviously you have never been targetted by the police. Obviously you are not a minority man (particularly black) living in some parts of USA. Obviously you haven't heard of the infiltration of the FBI by organized criminals (particularly the Italian mafia in the 60's and 70's). Obviously you haven't heard of police fabricating information and jailing people. Obviously you haven't heard of the government cooking up bogus charges and jailing people. Obviously McCarthyism is not part of your collective mind. Obviously you haven't heard of John Ashcroft's recent decree to spy on antiwar activists. Obviously you believe the legal system represent justice....Obviously you underestimate the power of the goverment.

    So to answer your question, I would rather have some guy off the street spying on me than the goverment ANY DAY OF THE WEEK! There is something that you don't understand about the government--any government. Governments are far more powerful than 1000 people put together! They have immense power. The illusion of a legal system--which IS an illusion--does not change any of this. One just needs to look through the history of the government that you live under to see what I mean (I picked USA but you can pick any govt).

    Sivaram Velauthapillai

    --
    Sivaram Velauthapillai
    Seeking the meaning of life... @slashdot of all places ;)
  36. Double Standard by delcielo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We applaud the hackers who so cleverly get around protections on technology. We had our "Free Kevin Mitnick" and "Free Dmitry" campaigns.

    Here is a nice hack done for a good reason by the same law enforcement that is supposed to investigate and stop such crimes as extortion. And how do we react? Government spying! Conspiracy!

    Really. That's just not very reasonable on our part.

    --
    Hot Damn! It's the Soggy Bottom Boys!
  37. Re:What are you supposed to do? - options by silverbax · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I've actually run into this issue a few times. The action I've taken in the past pretty much directly relates to the severity of the security flaw. For example, I've seen URL hacks which allow you to grab another customer's credit card information, and then some which allow only address information.

    My rule of thumb is that if a piece of information can be obtained and tracked to a specific individual, it's dangerous. That's the rule I use in my work as well.

    When I decide the situation warrants it, I send a professional, formal email to the company ( also the web admin if there is one ), stating what I found, screenshots and leave it at that. Sometimes I will point out that I intended to place an order, but halted when I saw the issue. I also let the company know they may contact me if more information is needed.

    This is what has happened in the past following these emails:

    1. Almost all companies send me an email thanking me and letting me know the problem has been corrected, and it has been. Case closed.

    2. I get a nasty email from the company ( usually this is with SMALL operations) telling me to take my business elsewhere. At first I would attempt to politely explain the risk, but soon realized that some sites have no intention of listening to me, and gave up. In that case, I may notify the BBB or other organization just to get someone else on their tail. I don't have time to chase down other people's security holes, so the best I can hope for is to let others know.

    In any case, I always use the Enron rule: What if I later had to explain my actions to a grand jury?

  38. As opposed to... by gosand · · Score: 4, Funny
    That's what happens when you try to extort a big company using Outlook.


    As opposed to a big company who tries to extort us to use Outlook?

    --

    My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

  39. Belongs on America's Dumbest by salesgeek · · Score: 5, Funny

    Here are three ways to get on America's Dumbest:

    1. Rob Taco Bell right after filling out job appication and interview. Be arrested when cops show up at your address on the application.

    2. Send extortion/blackmail emails using MS-Outlook from your normal ISP account. Be busted when FBI sends email using marketing tool like Neighborhood Email or eZine Manager. FBI is too embarassed to admit they used an e-newsletter tool and come up with the "ip address verifier" device.

    3. Shoplift naked. Be arrested when cop identifies the incredibly stupid butcher's meat chart tatoo when streaking through campus on a dare.

    4. Keep crack pipe, crack and lighter in glove box. Be arrested when you see a billboard advising "Drug checkpoint next exit" and begin throwing crack, lighter and pipe out the window while police are video taping looking for people throwing drugs and paraphanellia out the window.

    --
    -- $G
  40. Learn somethin' new each day... by spiritgreywolf · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is another reason I like reading /. You guys give me a good whack on the side of the head on nearly a daily basis.

    I read this and was foolishly thinking (probably like many do) that "oh, if I don't download an attachment and execute it there really is no danger. I mean really, if I don't "run" anything, how would anyone know?"

    Silly wabbit is right. It's another case myself of not being able to see the forest for the trees.

    I guess ANY HTML email can be malicious in a sense that it can snarf info if it actually interprets and points you to ANY website when you read it in its rendered state.

    Talk about eye opening. I'll bet 90% of the general public don't actually realize this can easily be done for targeting purposes. With this in mind it's probably not hard (and don't flame me for not knowing this guys) but targeted spam in order to verify addresses could point to "specially coded" .gif files where a server-side plugin can compare the requested .gif to a known email and verify "yep - that addy is active" - even when most people ignore the unsubscribe links.

    "The aspects of things that are most important to us are hidden because of their simplicity and familiarity" - Ludwig Wittgenstein

    --
    Never have a philosophy which supports a lack of courage
  41. Ask the reporter? by Doco · · Score: 4, Informative

    Didn't anyone else think that maybe just asking the reporter would do the trick? His email address is right at the bottom of the article.

    <sarcasm> oh wait - this is slashdot right - only two people actually read the article. </sarcasm>

    I emailed Mr. David Phelps asking what an "Internet Protocol Address Verifier" was and his brief reply was the following.

    "it's commonly referred to as a web bug. i used the term as contained in the government's search warrant."

    So while the theorizing here did come up with that as a possibility - it also came up with lots of other BS.

    Now the bizarre thing is that the feds used such a wierd term. Then again to a judge or lawyer the term "web bug" probably seems pretty bizarre.

  42. Re:is carnivore bad? by macho · · Score: 5, Informative

    If you're looking for sources of information, Ward Churchill and Jim Vander Wall's book Agents of Repression: The F.B.I.s Secret Wars Against the Black Panther Party and the American Indian Movement (South End Press) is a good start. When large numbers of readers refused to believe the stuff they had written (even though it extensively referenced the FBI's own documents), they did a follow-up book that just reprinted the FBI material called The COINTELPRO Papers: Documents from the FBI's Secret Wars Against Dissent in the United States. Harder to disbelieve that, I guess.

  43. Re:per-process firewall by redjeremy · · Score: 4, Informative

    Have a look at the 'owner' match extension to iptables:

    --cmd-owner name
    Matches if the packet was created by a process with the given command name. (this option is present only if iptables was compiled under a kernel supporting this feature)
  44. Re:is carnivore bad? by Sivaram_Velauthapill · · Score: 4, Informative
    I hope you read this post because I am going to justify everything I said as much as I can. I can't guarantee that I can find sources for everything. Some of the links I cited aren't 100% related to my point but they are the best I can find without spending even more hours searching for links.



    Maybe you'll learn something... just maybe.

    Sivaram Velauthapillai
    --
    Sivaram Velauthapillai
    Seeking the meaning of life... @slashdot of all places ;)