Slashdot Mirror


Scam Combines Patriot Act FUD With IE Bug

LostCluster writes "CNET, Reuters, and the AP are all reporting this morning about a circulating e-mail scam that claims that people will lose their FDIC bank account insurance because they are suspected of violating the Patriot Act unless they confirm their bank account information with a website. The scammers then use the already documented bug in IE that allows a site in Pakistan to get 'www.fdic.gov' to appear in the URL bar. Where's an MS patch when we really need one?"

447 comments

  1. Oh NO Mr Bill! by Dutchmaan · · Score: 5, Funny

    I hope this isn't what Bill was talking about with The Secure Computing Initiative

    1. Re:Oh NO Mr Bill! by Skiron · · Score: 3, Informative

      I believe M$ said that this wasn't important to fix. Moz and all the others had it patched the same very day it was posted on bugtraq.

      Nick

    2. Re:Oh NO Mr Bill! by TheOldFart · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There may be a point in there. Not that I would exonerate Mr. Bill, heck just the thought of it gives goose bumps... but... if you actually believe in such a bullshit email, wouldn't you be the type that couldn't tell the difference between the URL displayed and the rear end of a African sparrow? If you are the type that would check the URL, you are also the type that would take this email to be what it is and not eat it just like that.

    3. Re:Oh NO Mr Bill! by austad · · Score: 3, Informative

      A friend of mine got one of the emails, the text of it was very convincing and well written. Normally stuff like this has typos, but this one had a very compelling story to tell and the website for it was quite well done also.

      I can see how many people would have been suckered into providing their info.

      --
      Need Free Juniper/NetScreen Support? JuniperForum
    4. Re:Oh NO Mr Bill! by Skiron · · Score: 1

      Yes, but if you use Outlook (and it's variants) all you see is the spoofed @URL because it uses IE to render it. Nick

    5. Re:Oh NO Mr Bill! by berzerke · · Score: 2, Interesting

      ...I can see how many people would have been suckered into providing their info...

      Well, on the bright side, maybe some good will come of this. While I doubt many will wake up and suddenly realize that IE is a bad browser (like most of the /. crowd already knows), perhaps some who are ripped off might come to conclusion (for the wrong reasons, but hey, any port in storm) that the Patriot Act is a bad idea.

    6. Re:Oh NO Mr Bill! by NanoGator · · Score: 2, Informative

      "Moz and all the others had it patched the same very day it was posted on bugtraq."

      Moz doesn't exactly fix it. Granted, it's better than what IE does as you can see where it is really headed. However, it still sends you a misleading URL.

      "http://www.microsoft.com%01@zapthedingbat.com/sec urity/ex01/vun2.htm"

      It works as expected, but it is still not fixed. Opera, however, does actually address this issue. If you attempt to go to a URL that is formed like that, an error window appears. It says that you are trying to go to a site that has a Username in it, and it tells you specfically which domain you are trying to enter. Without this warning, Mozilla is only a little better off than IE.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    7. Re:Oh NO Mr Bill! by Skiron · · Score: 1

      Well, OK, I admit defeat seeing that lusers at work click on anything, even like "I am a virus - click me?". But you know what I mean.

      Nick

    8. Re:Oh NO Mr Bill! by NanoGator · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Anybody can make mistakes. URLs can be quite complicated. Check out the URL in my window just for posting this reply:

      "http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=94152&op=Repl y&threshold=1&commentsort=0&tid=172&mode=nested&pi d=8078184"

      Most URLs these days end up looking like that. All it takes is a moment of distraction to not notice a malicious URL. It's the downside of only being human.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    9. Re:Oh NO Mr Bill! by jadavis · · Score: 1

      Well, I try to avoid "moments of distraction" while being asked to enter my bank account information.

      Sure, if you're just clicking a link you may not even notice (which is why /. tells you the domain in brackets next to the link, so you can't be mislead as easily). But when the target page is asking for my bank account information, then I take a closer look.

      --
      Social scientists are inspired by theories; scientists are humbled by facts.
    10. Re:Oh NO Mr Bill! by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 1

      >Well, I try to avoid "moments of distraction" while being asked to enter my bank account information.

      People also try not to wreck their cars while they adjust the volume on their radio, but it happens anyway.

    11. Re:Oh NO Mr Bill! by Skiron · · Score: 1

      Yes, but the point I was making is that if a luser USES outlook and it's variants, the URL would look normal due to the bug in IE (cos lookout uses IE to parse). Other mailers show it as such for what the URL really is. If you click it then, well... Nick

    12. Re:Oh NO Mr Bill! by dnoyeb · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't it be both simple and great to list the web server you are connected to by both IP and domain name in the status bar???

      WTH else are they using the status bar for?

      I thought my wife to look for the lock icon, and check the certificate. But she was probably just giving me the nod treatment.

    13. Re:Oh NO Mr Bill! by cwernli · · Score: 3, Funny

      The "Secure Computing Initiative" approach with this bug is documented in the Knowledge Base:

      This article discusses steps you can take to help protect yourself from spoofed Web sites. To summarize, these steps are: [...]

      • Do not click any hyperlinks that you do not trust. Type them in the Address bar yourself.
    14. Re:Oh NO Mr Bill! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You get the nod treatment from your wife?

      What do you have to promise to get that? I only get the Nod Treatment without begging on Christmas eve, Valentines day, and our Aniversary.

    15. Re:Oh NO Mr Bill! by tiger99 · · Score: 1
      No don't install the patch, take the more sensible route and get rid of that failed attempt at a web browser called IE. No-one has to use it, and it has been so badly discredited that I don't know why anyone bothers. There will always be security holes in it, and the patches will always be lagging weeks, if not months behind.

      If a web site does not work except in IE, then let them know, there is no excuse whatsoever for not being standards-compliant, especially if the site is selling something and needs to be seen by as many people as possible. Any webmaster who makes his site work in IE only is a danger to everyone's security and should be dismissed from his job at once.

      The same goes for that disgraceful email client and automatic virus installer Outlook, and its Express variant. These things should have no place on any computer, anywhere.

      If you have to use these vile things at work, I would suggest that your IT department needs to be replaced as a matter of urgency.

    16. Re:Oh NO Mr Bill! by Threni · · Score: 1

      People who fall for this sort of scam don't deserve money!

    17. Re:Oh NO Mr Bill! by jadavis · · Score: 1

      How much time do you spend in a car? How often do you enter your bank account information on a website that you've never been to before?

      I think there's more room for distraction in the former than the latter.

      --
      Social scientists are inspired by theories; scientists are humbled by facts.
    18. Re:Oh NO Mr Bill! by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      That doesn't negate my point.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    19. Re:Oh NO Mr Bill! by inode_buddha · · Score: 1

      It almost got me because I've been out of work (no deposits) and owe the bank for my life insurance + student loans. Then I read the header and noticed a Yahoo account. I got suspicious, then I got pissed when I saw the spamcop tag. Mainly because I got all worried. Now I'm *still* pissed because even tho I use Linux/Moz, this shit was made possible by an IE bug and wasn't it MSFT who swore under oath that opening their code would pose a national security risk? Anyway it was a very convincing spam, but I know the bank would have snail-mailed shit like that.

      --
      C|N>K
  2. Wow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...now we're outsourcing scams to India too.

    1. Re:Wow... by TheFairElf · · Score: 0, Informative

      Where does India come in? Your thinking that Pakistan belongs to "that area of the world close to where all the outsourcing is" shows your utter lack of basic geographical knowledge

    2. Re:Wow... by Darken_Everseek · · Score: 2, Informative

      Um. India and Pakistan border each other, do they not?

    3. Re:Wow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny
      So the rest of the world[1] can now interchange "America" and "Mexico", can we?

      [1] Yes, it really does exist.

    4. Re:Wow... by LostCluster · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Either that, or he's predicting the outcome of a war that's been threatened for years but hasn't happened yet...

    5. Re:Wow... by aulendil · · Score: 3, Informative

      ...shows your utter lack of basic geographical knowledge...
      And shows your utter lack of historical knowledge a well ;-) (and probably the parent's post too). Pakistan where a part of the crown colony India until 1948.

    6. Re:Wow... by Bender+Unit+22 · · Score: 1

      So the rest of the world[1] can now interchange "America" and "Mexico", can we?

      Well, it IS basically the same thing, is it not?

    7. Re:Wow... by Darken_Everseek · · Score: 1

      I know it exists, I'm Canadian.

      The comment was disparaging geographical knowledge; and since they're do border each other, that was uncalled for. It's the religious and political philosophies that differ.

    8. Re:Wow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pakistan, India and Bangladesh used to be "India" under the British empire. When the British let them go, they seperated them into 2 countries to avoid tensions (LOL): India and Pakistan to the left and right of India. Then, the right part of pakistan seperated after a deadly civil war and became Bangladesh.

    9. Re:Wow... by dicepackage · · Score: 2, Funny

      Thank god I played it safe and invested with a Nigerian general.

    10. Re:Wow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      [1] Yes, it really does exist.

      typical arrogant eurotwat

      i am surprised that you haven't been modded up yet

    11. Re:Wow... by Sexy+Bern · · Score: 2, Funny
      There's also more the "the rest of the world" than the Europe!

      Australia, South America, Asia, the middle East, Africa, the Arctic, the Antarctic, etc. etc.

      Is ignorance worse than arrogance?

      I don't know and I care!

    12. Re:Wow... by Sexy+Bern · · Score: 2, Funny
      Hmm. Typing and beer. Not a good combination.

      The gag, muffed up to the n'th degree, should of course have read "I don't know and I don't care".

      What an arse.

    13. Re:Wow... by js7a · · Score: 1
      Actually, things in Kashmir are going pretty well at the moment.

      Back on topic, this story can explains the article all too well.

    14. Re:Wow... by DAldredge · · Score: 1

      According to Bush, yes they can.

    15. Re:Wow... by xigxag · · Score: 2, Funny

      Wow, your browbeating an Anonymous Coward shows your utter lack of basic Slashdot knowledge. ;)

      --
      There are two kinds of people: 1) those who start arrays with one and 1) those who start them with zero.
    16. Re:Wow... by Fuzzle · · Score: 1

      Technically, they can, because "America" refers to the continent or continents with "America" in their name. Now if you want to interchange USA with Mexico, that may be a little different...

    17. Re:Wow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      (Plus it was funny regardless. It's like that old joke blaming the Titanic on "Teh Z10Ni5ts". You know, Iceberg, Goldberg, same difference.)

    18. Re:Wow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, in fact, they can. THE WHOLE FUCKING PLACE IS CALLED AMERICA.

      Our little country is called the United States of America (yeah, you might have heard about it); and much like our relation with Mexico, Pakistan and India ONCE shared parts of the same territory.

      Perhaps your history professor didn't relate that to you? You ignorant twit.

    19. Re:Wow... by Sexy+Bern · · Score: 1
      By your reckoning, Mexican citizens can legitimately call themselves "Americans"! Saves you a bomb on immigration control then!

      Not too sure the Canadians would leap on that opportunity though :D

      I, for one, welcome our new American overlords!

    20. Re:Wow... by be-fan · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      Your parsing of the original posters comment makes no sense. So what if it used to be part of India at one time, it is not part of India now. Is Texas interchangable with Mexico because they once used to be a part of the same country?

      --
      A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
    21. Re:Wow... by zeekiorage · · Score: 4, Informative
      From the CNET article...
      The link to the Web site provided in the e-mail message leads to a server in Karachi, Pakistan, CNET News.com has discovered. Moreover, the link is formatted to take advantage of an Internet Explorer flaw that allows an attacker to hide the true destination of the link; in this case, the address bar in Internet Explorer displays "www.fdic.gov," while the actual Web site is at a different address in Pakistan.

      India and Pakistan are two different countries, India is not even mentioned in the article. Who modded this funny?
    22. Re:Wow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, Pakistan WAS once part of India, but that ended way back when the British Empire finally gave up the territory.

    23. Re:Wow... by smittyoneeach · · Score: 2, Funny

      Given the current demographic trends, yes.

      --
      Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
    24. Re:Wow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, they can legitimately call themselves Americans. Seeing as how they're from the continent of South America, and also seeing as there is no country called "America" (at least, not to the memory of my simple mind), then by all means, every Mexican SHOULD call themselves americans. Same with the Canadians, same with anyone else in this forsaken place.

      Now, you see, I'm a citizen of the United States of America. I'm not an american any more than the next hispanic, in Mexico, Chile or in the United States, or anywhere else on this continent. As far as I'm aware anyone from the country called America... Well, they're legend and myth.

      If you people from the "rest of the world" chose to call us "Americans", there's not a whole hell of alot any one of us can do (except bomb your asses to before limbo). And what can I say about that, except "we'll get around to it", and judging by our current administration, it's not a far cry.

      I guess it's the same as us "Americans" calling the British "limeys", or perhaps "chinless wonders", "crumpet stuffers", "teabag", or from us "Americans" calling the French "spineless cowards", or perhaps "surrender monkeys".

    25. Re:Wow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > Is Texas interchangable with Mexico because they once used to be a part of the same country?

      uh, yeah ;-)

    26. Re:Wow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was, like, a joke.

      Sheesh. Both countries are next to each other, on the other side of the globe, and both have a lot in common.

    27. Re:Wow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just face it, you lost. Move on to another thread and pretend that this didn't happen.

    28. Re:Wow... by aulendil · · Score: 1

      You're right, I'm wrong (see, wasn't too hard). When trying to impress the /. crowd with my enormous collection of _data_, I forgot to process it. My bad.

      As for Texas, of course it's no longer a part of Mexico. As for India, it is by my logic as much a part of Pakistan as the other way around.

      Hope any of this makes sense, clock beint late, me being drunk, english not my language of choice...

    29. Re:Wow... by Zoshnell · · Score: 0

      My ass IS Antartica you insensitive clod!

      --
      "Do you suppose that's why God lives in the Heavens? Because he lives in fear of His creations?" - Steve Buscemi
    30. Re:Wow... by Zoshnell · · Score: 0

      In response to your sig, tests are "testy". You can thank me later for what huge epiphanies this will cause you. You might want to lay down and take the rest of the day off.

      --
      "Do you suppose that's why God lives in the Heavens? Because he lives in fear of His creations?" - Steve Buscemi
    31. Re:Wow... by Sexy+Bern · · Score: 1
      Strange thing was, I wasn't knocking the people from the continent of North America, so I find it odd that you turned nasty on an ally - I'm in the UK.

      Every citizen of the USA that I've met has been an absolutely diamond geezer and a true ambassador for your nation.

      You, sir, with your "bomb your asses" attitude do your nation a great injustice. If there's one thing I though the USA understood, it was PR/marketing. Given today's news stories, both of our nations need to take a long, hard look at how the rest of the world (no pun intended) must look at us.

      USA: ~5% of the world's population UK: ~1% of the world's population

      94% of the world's population is outside of our special "club".

    32. Re:Wow... by kgarcia · · Score: 2, Funny

      Americans... Canadians
      Pakistanis... Indians...

      What's the difference?

    33. Re:Wow... by Fermier+de+Pomme+de · · Score: 1, Insightful
      Who modded this funny?

      Somebody with a sense of humor?

    34. Re:Wow... by Clay+Pigeon+-TPF-VS- · · Score: 1

      (Obligatory South Park Reference):Canadians have floppy heads and beady eyes.

      --
      Viral software licensing is not freedom, it is in fact GNU/Socialism.
    35. Re:Wow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Is ignorance worse than arrogance?
      I don't know if you're slamming the "rest of the world" comment or my "eurotwat" comment.

      My point was that it is the Europeans who feel they must remind us "bloody yanks" that other countries exist. Every time I read such a statement it reaffirms my belief that Europeans are arrogant cocksuckers. Well, there are some Aussies to blame, as well... But, anyway, I was not implying that "the rest of the world == Europe."

      I am surprised it took so long for him to be modded up, though.

    36. Re:Wow... by Clay+Pigeon+-TPF-VS- · · Score: 1

      Mexico is part of North America, as are all the "Central American" nations. No, Central America is not its own continent. Its part of North America

      --
      Viral software licensing is not freedom, it is in fact GNU/Socialism.
    37. Re:Wow... by Curtman · · Score: 1

      Seeing as how they're from the continent of South America

      Who's in South America? Mexico?

      I'm a citizen of the United States of America

      I think we assumed that already.

    38. Re:Wow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Umm its modded FUNNY, not geographically accurate. :p

    39. Re:Wow... by mOdQuArK! · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Given today's news stories, both of our nations need to take a long, hard look at how the rest of the world (no pun intended) must look at us.

      When I think about how people in other nations look at Americans now, I get depressed. 5 or 6 years ago, I had a lot of fun traveling around meeting people in a lot of different countries (for work). In general, they were friendly & generally had good feelings toward Americans (a few of them explained that "Americans" had an "honest" and "naive" (gullible?) attitude about life which they found appealing - apparently I fit this stereotype pretty well :-).

      The last few contacts I've had though - brrr...I felt like a low-on-the-totem-pole wannabe gang member being shunned by the "civilized" members of the school. It's difficult to tell how this new attitude toward Americans might be affecting our sales; I'm pretty sure it doesn't help. It's _really_ terrifying to hear our so-called "leaders" (and the sheeple who bleat their praises) being _proud_ of being able to cause that kind of reaction in the rest of the world.

    40. Re:Wow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What the hell? Secular democratic India a part of that religious hellhole warmongering military dictator ruled Pakistan? Never. Pakistan was a part of whole undivided India under the British rule and the name was coined at the time of independence of India(a secular state) in the name of religion by religious zealots on both sides. Pakistan has waged many wars to get Kashmir but has failed miserably and has encouraged Taliban style infiltration into Indian Kashmir. As if things were going great in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir(POK). Wake up and read the world news once in a while you insensitive troll.

    41. Re:Wow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As the British say;
      "The Wogs start at Calais." :)

    42. Re:Wow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Psst...Mexico is in North America.

    43. Re:Wow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...shows your utter lack of basic geographical knowledge... And shows your utter lack of historical knowledge a well ;-) (and probably the parent's post too). Pakistan where a part of the crown colony India until 1948.

      Oh yeah? Well your post shows your utter lack of grammar, I believe you meant to say "were" as apposed to "where".

    44. Re:Wow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So do you come from the part of Europe whose Ass America Saved?

      Or the Part of Europe whos ass America Kicked?

    45. Re:Wow... by thebackwash · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but I spent some time in Honduras, and there, the kids are taught in school that there is the single American continent, and not North America and South America.

    46. Re:Wow... by IndependentVik · · Score: 1

      . . . and both have a lot in common."

      Like being mortal enemies?
      (sorry, couldn't resist)

      --
      I'd suggest you don't use Slashdot as your only news source, or you will suffer permanent brain damage.
    47. Re:Wow... by Sj0 · · Score: 1

      Seeing as how they're from the continent of South America

      MEXICANS?!

      --
      It's been a long time.
    48. Re:Wow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And your post shows a lack of getting the hell away from the computer once in a while.

      Go outside. Breathe some air. You need it.

    49. Re:Wow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pakistan became independant a full year before India in 1947. The British left India in 1948. Parts of undivided India with a Muslim majority were turned into Pakistan. This wasnt done willingly by the British - this was done by Jinnah who campaigned to get a seperate country, who meant for Pakistan to be a secular state. He died in 1948 to the shock and dismay of Lord Mountbatten who would never have let partitioning occur if he had known that Jinnah just had a year to go.

      The Hindus wanted all of India to themselves as they wanted some good old fashioned revenge from the Muslims who'd ruled over them for a few centuries before the British showed up.

      Anyway, in 1947 West and East Pakistan were partioned off on both sides of India. The fiasco in Kashmir started when a Muslim majority state with a Hindu leader chose to join India and the local population revolted. And has still been revolting.

      Tensions between India and Pakistan as a result have always been high. Pakistan wants Kashmir as it has a muslim majority and thinks it should have come to Pakistan. Also several of the rivers of this agriculture based country flow in from Kashmir and its worried about the future if those territories go to India. In the 60s/70s tensions peaked and East Pakistan seperated into what is now Bangladesh. It was inevitable as the illustrious and meddlesome Lord Mountbatten had never meant for Pakistan to exist, much less be viable. Speaking of which, Nehru (Hindu politician opposed to partition) had been oinking Mountbatten's wife in that period so they were bedfellows in a fashion....

      Being at war and having half your territory on the other side of a much larger enemy is a logistical nightmare and to my knowledge there is no country in the world with half of it on the other side of an enemy.

      Yeah Alaska is on the other side of Canada but if Canada was bigger, better armed and hostile with a country suffering from its own internal problems, the USA wouldnt be able to hold on to it for too long either. (assume for a moment that it isnt a superpower!)

      Pakistan has had its fair share of problems with fundamentalists hijacking the country. Aided in no small part by the oil rich arabs of the militant wahabi sect, they have no tolerance for muslims of other sects, let alone people of other religions.

      At present, the military government is doing its best to keep these fundoos under control. Pakistan is one of the unsung heros of the war on terrorism because without Pakistan's help there would have been no chance of catching Al Qaida operatives escaping from Afghanistan. As a result of this co-operation in the war on terror, Pakistan itself is a major terrorism target with frequent bombings and assasination attempts by Al Qaida on the President - incidentaly the improving relations with India and the economic improvements in the country have all come under dictator Generl Musharaf.

      Hes probably the best thing thats happened to the subcontinent in general and is doing a lot to bring stability to the region. The extremists and militants want him gone so the fundoos can get their hands on Pakistans nuclear weapons.

      In this case, the last thing Pakistan, or the world, needs is for a "democracy" to run Pakistan because we all know how susceptible "democracy" is to corruption and greed especially with a literacy rate of less than 10%.

      This concludes your brief education on Pakistan and India!

    50. Re:Wow... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      By the same logic we could say that England and France were once ruled by the Roman empire thus using the same logic you used we could say that British people smell and French people have horid food.

    51. Re:Wow... by hellraizr · · Score: 1

      phew! atleast the USA isn't on the *dead bottom* of the education food chain. I'm pretty damn sure even the aborigines in the aussie outback know the diffrence from 2 very diffrent and hardly connected (panama canal anyone?) land masses.

  3. I Know Where by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Where's an MS patch when we really need one?

    Being prevented by the DMCA?

    1. Re:I Know Where by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://www.openwares.org/index.php?option=com_remo sitory&Itemid=26&func=fileinfo&parent=category&fil ecatid=17

      Openwares has their own IE spoof patch

  4. Who Cares !! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I mean with Bennifer break up I have no time for such drivel stories

  5. Solution by BWJones · · Score: 3, Funny

    Where's an MS patch when we really need one?

    These solutions will solve your problem. :-)

    --
    Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    1. Re:Solution by Liselle · · Score: 4, Informative

      For those of us that don't feel like switching to another OS, Opera will do.

      --
      Auto-reply to ACs: "Truly, you have a dizzying intellect."
    2. Re:Solution by UnassumingLocalGuy · · Score: 5, Informative

      And for those of us too cheap to buy a new browser, Mozilla or Firebird will have to do.

      --
      "Hu, ho, ho-ah-oh-oh-oh. Hu, ho ho-ah-oh-oh-oh. Mario Paint! Whoaaa!"
    3. Re:Solution by jfengel · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Does it solve the problem? (I'm genuinely asking; I don't have a Mac around to test it.)

      The problem is that IE (and Firebird, and Mozilla) all display the URL as typed, including user name and password information. So if you type http://www.slashdot.org:foo@www.whitehouse.gov/ you get directed to a nasty site, even though the URL appears to say www.slashdot.org.

      (I don't seem to be able to reproduce the link exactly here; I think Slashdot may be removing the user name and password info.)

      The solution seems fairly simple; remove user name and password information from the displayed URL. But that's not necessarily the Right Thing, displaying a different URL than you clicked. I don't consider the problem a "bug" in the same sense that buffer overflows are a bug.

      Clearly it's a problem; I am a professional programmer and wasn't aware of this until it was pointed out to me.

      If Safari has a solution, I'd like to know it. Mac developers are pretty good about doing The Right Thing.

    4. Re:Solution by LousyPhreak · · Score: 5, Informative

      But the problem is your solutions also requires one of these upgrades.

      I would rather recomend this upgrade.

      Or if you have a dislike for linux even just this upgrade helps much.

      ;)

      --
      -- Karma: beyond good and evil - mostly affected by posting political
    5. Re:Solution by Liselle · · Score: 5, Informative
      I hate to plug Opera twice in the same thread, heh. But if I click on a link like one you mentioned, Opera will throw up a dialog box that says this:
      Security warning:

      You are about to go to an address containing a username.

      Username: www.slashdot.org
      Server: www.whitehouse.gov

      Are you sure you want to go to this address?
      Piece of cake.
      --
      Auto-reply to ACs: "Truly, you have a dizzying intellect."
    6. Re:Solution by Jugalator · · Score: 1

      Or this if you don't want to spend over a thousand to switch your hardware in order to meet said systems hardware requirements. :-P

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
    7. Re:Solution by Richard_at_work · · Score: 4, Informative

      The problem was that if you introduced a certain character just before the @ sign, the false url (eg the one that is actually the auth detail) will be the only one displayed. The real url would be left off, and thus people would be tricked. Its interesting to note that a similiar issue has been around a fair while, as there have been scams based on it (eg "banks" emailing you, asking you to click on a link and verify your login details. Page displayed looks real as its just a copy of your banks real site, but the url has @www.scammersurl.com at the end, after what looks like valid HTTP/GET data.

      Im going on what official reports of the bug say, because I have never actually been able to replicate the effect myself, on IE5.5, IE5.5sp1, IE6, IE6sp1 and IE6sp2, so it does seem that not all installs are vulnerable, as they all displayed the fake url and the real url as you would expect in the address bar. For the record, I tried this on WinXP (just the IE6 versions) and Win2k.

    8. Re:Solution by Smidge204 · · Score: 3, Informative

      That was either some biting political commentary or a bad typo. (The real "nasty" site is .com not .gov :P)

      The REAL problem is that inserting a %01 and unescaping the URL causes IE to NOT display the URL to display as typed. Thus, it redirects you to a different site without you knowing. Only IE does this, so clearly there's a "right way" and a "wrong way" to do it and IE is doing it wrong. That's a BUG and a big security problem.
      =Smidge=

    9. Re:Solution by slamb · · Score: 4, Informative
      The problem is that IE (and Firebird, and Mozilla) all display the URL as typed, including user name and password information. So if you type http://www.slashdot.org:foo@www.whitehouse.gov/ you get directed to a nasty site, even though the URL appears to say www.slashdot.org. [...] I don't consider the problem a "bug" in the same sense that buffer overflows are a bug.

      What you described has been known for a long time and arguably isn't a bug, yes. But what they're using is a newer variation that's more dangerous and clearly a bug. If you include a %00 just before the @, only "http://www.slashdot.org" is displayed. (Apparently the display code evalutes the hex escape and treats the %00 as end-of-string, but the engine itself does not.) Your only real indication that something is wrong is the lack of the trailing "/", which you're not likely to notice even if you know what it means.

    10. Re:Solution by jd142 · · Score: 1

      The problem is that IE (and Firebird, and Mozilla) all display the URL as typed, including user name and password information. So if you type http://www.slashdot.org:foo@www.whitehouse.gov/ you get directed to a nasty site, even though the URL appears to say www.slashdot.org.

      No. I can *not* reproduce the bug you describe in Firebird running under XP, and I can't imagine the bug would be present in the Linux version and not the windows. I tried both typing the url you entered and copying and pasting and in both cases Firebird displays the whole url and does not appear to say just www.slashdot.org.

      Your example didn't work in the latest patched version of IE 6, so I went to http://www.zapthedingbat.com/security/ex01/vun1.ht m and tested from there. Even from that site, Firebird correctly display the entire url. It was not vulnerable to the bug. My copy of IE 6, with all latest patches, was vulnerable.

    11. Re:Solution by holizz · · Score: 1

      Firebird (0.7) displays http://www.slashdot.org:foo@www.whitehouse.gov/ in the URL bar. I think that pretty much solves the problem of misleading people. Although gullability and stupidity is always a problem.

    12. Re:Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      hmmm, your solution was interesting but i was unable to find the upgrade to migrate from win2k/xp. because if said upgrade doesnt exist, it really isnt a solution but rather fanboy talk that doesnt do anyone any good.

    13. Re:Solution by jaavaaguru · · Score: 0

      I was under the impression that "the problem" was that IE makes the user think that they are really looking at "www.whitehouse.gov" rather than "www.slashdot.org". This does not happen with Mozilla Firebird or Konqueror 3.2. The URL "http://www.slashdot.org:foo@www.whitehouse.gov/" remains displayed in the address bar, clearly indicating to the user that they are viewing "www.whitehouse.org" rather than "www.slashdot.org" (and anyone who reads slashdot knows it's just http://slashdot.org anyway ;-)

    14. Re:Solution by siphi · · Score: 0

      and for those of us that dont mind small adds, opera will do.

      --
      Sig (appended to the end of comments you post, 120 chars)
    15. Re:Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While, no error message shows up like in opera, it does show the entite link, just as typed/clicked into Safari.

    16. Re:Solution by Chicks_Hate_Me · · Score: 1

      hmmm somehow it won't install on my x86 based system...in other words STFU. I don't want to pay $2000 for a software upgrade.

    17. Re:Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow.. I'm on Slashdot and someone just called swiching to a Mac an upgrade.

      I wonder how much Satan enjoys building snowmen..

    18. Re:Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm an apple repair technician, and i gotta say, you're a LOT closer to the truth than you think....

    19. Re:Solution by lfourrier · · Score: 0

      So if you type http://www.slashdot.org:foo@www.whitehouse.gov/ you get directed to a nasty site, even though the URL appears to say www.slashdot.org.

      if you type http://www.slashdot.org:foo@www.whitehouse.gov/, you are, by the spec of url, directed to www.whitehouse.gov using user www.slashdot.org and password foo.

      if you say the url appear to be toward /., you:
      1) don't belongs to /.
      or
      2) should have been more clear in saying that unsuspecting users are cheated.

      I don't know of a simple solution to this problem. And given the "if they are stupid, it's there fault" sentiment I feel in a lot of US /. readers, I don't even want to suggest some solution involving some government.

    20. Re:Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      And for those of us too cheap to upgrade our Timex Sinclairs to something more powerful like a Commodore 64, Lynx will have to do.

    21. Re:Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, I bet I could write an extension for Firebird/Mozilla that would do the same thing!

    22. Re:Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, the easiest solution to this scam is to just NOT be a fucking idiot. Patch or no patch, you have to be pretty god damned naive about the world to think "gee, the government is going all this over the internet?". I mean, duh... how did they attach your email address to a specific bank account for starters? And also, it's hard enough to get your average bank to let you do your banking online. Lots of hoops to jump through. And lots of banks only do "online banking" through an application like Quicken - not actually over a web site. Yet, supposedly, you're to believe that it's a snap of a finger to deal with this "FDIC" crap online through some random .gov site that some random email was sent to you for?

      This is just along the lines of a "stupidity tax". Nothing more.

    23. Re:Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As for those of us who just want to get rid of Windows, Linux or something BSD will do as well.

    24. Re:Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, you have a Timex Sinclair! I'm jealous. I only have an early Altair. Browsing the internet is a really pain. No CRT or television output, just a row of lights blinking out ASCII characters. No keyboard, just a row of switches. One day I guess I should upgrade to at least an Adam or Osbourne, but that Apple II looks so darned attractive that I may hold out for the Apple III.

    25. Re:Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Firebird works for me. If on the rare occasion i must use a poorly (read MS only) writen website then you can always fall back on IE. But this is pretty rare for me.

    26. Re:Solution by jfengel · · Score: 1

      I don't think it's at all clear that http://slashdot.org@www.whitehouse.gov comes from whitehouse.gov. Users are used to looking at lengthy URLs (e.g. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B000 05RKOE/ref=pd_qpt_gw_2/102-5119174-9172131) and ignoring anything after what appears to be the web site name.

      Especially if one obfuscates further:
      http://slashdot.org:dfkjkasfznc=dfjkkerj -dfjed=fjk dndjfserncs@www.whitehouse.gov/dfkdf/dfkjdf/dfsf, when the whitehouse.gov part has scrolled off the screen and buried in the text. You have to watch for the @ sign in every long URL.

      So you think you're looking at slashdot, but you're really looking at the White House. Or you think you're looking at your bank, maybe even with SSL on (and verified, too) but you're really looking at the scammer's site.

    27. Re:Solution by interiot · · Score: 1

      Yyou don't have to be too cheap... Mozilla is also endlessly extensible due to its HUGE reliance and integration with its javascript front-end (besides the whole thing being open-source, of course). If you're a decent programmer, Mozilla/Konq/etc... are really your only choices.

    28. Re:Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, don't complain. I only have an ENIAC. Those things require you to replace their vaccuum tubes once every 20 minutes.....On the plus side, I have been able to crack the Bush code. Apparently there are some very wierd Satanic messages in his last state of the union speach.

    29. Re:Solution by jfengel · · Score: 1

      Let's just say that when I first found out about this trick, I didn't realize how it was done. I don't know if my grandmother would think to look for the at-sign for the real name. The username/password part of the URL is not used very often and I think many people expect it to mean something from what it really means.

    30. Re:Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If Opera had a vagina I bet you would be humping away right now.

    31. Re:Solution by jfengel · · Score: 1

      Oh. Thanks. I didn't realize that's how the %00 works, and that is a bug. Very clever.

    32. Re:Solution by zcat_NZ · · Score: 2, Insightful



      I suggest using the official Microsoft patch?


      (OK, not really the official MSFT patch since there isn't one yet; my link demonstrates the bug by providing a Mozilla download on a msft-parody download page, complete with microsoft.com url..)



      (Yeah, I know.. I'm an attention-whore..)

      --
      455fe10422ca29c4933f95052b792ab2
    33. Re:Solution by elcid73 · · Score: 1

      I don't have time to write extensions. That's why I like Opera.

    34. Re:Solution by Richard_at_work · · Score: 1
      Just to post some proof that it doesnt always work:

      Both of these methods have been described on here as the way to do it, and were described as the method in the previous slashdot article on this. THe same behaviour happens whether or not I include a :foo (password) in the url before the %00@.

      This is an unpatched IE6 install on XP. If im doing something wrong, please post a reply and I will test it.

      And that, folks, was the scream of my DSL router ripping the bare molten telephone cables out of its socket.
    35. Re:Solution by the_mad_poster · · Score: 1

      ...and I can't imagine the bug would be present in the Linux version and not the windows.

      I can verify 0.7 on Linux is tested and safe on my box here at home.

      --
      Alito: A vote for Alito is a punch in the eye to put that bitch back in her place!
    36. Re:Solution by utlemming · · Score: 4, Funny

      In other news: The Whitehouse is reported that its website, www.whitehouse.gov is under some sort of DDoS. Apparently, thousands of computers around the world are supplying "http://www.slashdot.org" as atempt to login into the server.

      --
      The views expressed are mine own and do not express the views of my employer.
    37. Re:Solution by Googo · · Score: 0

      Seems like the scam is going everywhere.

      This is the link format mentioned.

      That was the link I received in a e-mail.

      http://paydirect.yahoo.com%01%01%01%01%01%01%01% 01 %01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%0 1%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01% 01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01 %01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%0 1%01%01%01%01%01@69.15.6.126/f/

      Contents:
      Dear yahoo Paydirect user, thank you for using our system. We kindly ask you to edit some information within your Paydirect account, due to our new policy rules and improved protection matters. Please click here and follow the instructions .

      Paydirect Administration

    38. Re:Solution by Stalus · · Score: 4, Informative

      And sometimes on that occasion you can put "about:config" in the address bar, change general.useragent.vendor to "MSIE" and have it work anyway. MBNA recently changed their online payment system, and they're telling people to do this if they want to use Firebird. Just change it back when you're done so that the rest of the world is aware of the fact that other browsers are used!

    39. Re:Solution by ealar+dlanvuli · · Score: 1

      I have a working example I made for my boss here

      It doesn't work in Firebird, I didn't test in Mozilla.

      --
      I live in a giant bucket.
    40. Re:Solution by bar-agent · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it solves the problem. In Safari's address field, the URL would show up like this:

      http://www.slashdot.org%00:foo@www.whitehouse.go v/

      Rather than:

      http://www.slashdot.org

      As it does in IE. I got one of these messages purporting to be from Earthlink (my ISP) asking for updated credit card information. But then I looked at the URL, and said, "that's not right".

      See? Mac developers are pretty good about doing the Right Thing.

      --
      i'd hit it so hard, if you pulled me out you'd be the king of britain [bash.org]
    41. Re:Solution by ncc74656 · · Score: 1
      So if you type http://www.slashdot.org:foo@www.whitehouse.gov/ you get directed to a nasty site

      s/.gov/.com/g, perhaps?

      --
      20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
    42. Re:Solution by Dasaan · · Score: 1

      It'd be nice if this could be automated or better still allow the browser ID being sent to be adusted on a site by site (perhaps even a page by page) basis.

      --
      XP is basicly 98 with a lot more extra features to hunt down and disable. --Dram
    43. Re:Solution by _xeno_ · · Score: 2, Interesting
      You're doing it wrong. I'm assuming you're just inserting the %01 character into a URL. You actually have to sneak a "^A" character into the URL, either using JavaScript or an HTML entity. It does, in fact, work under IE6. Note that Mozilla (or at least Firebird) reescapes the bad character so it shows you the bad URL.

      Anyway, check out my sample page that demonstrates the bug.

      The basic and easiest way to reproduce this is something like "<a href="http://slashdot.org&#1;@www.msn.com/">...</a &gt".

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
    44. Re:Solution by Richard_at_work · · Score: 1

      I was using PHP to sneak a ^A char into the stream, just forgot to mention it. Anyway, on your sample page, the second link works as advertisied, but the first link doesnt unless you visit it after the second link, and only then does it work :) Wierd or what? Again, unpatched IE6.

    45. Re:Solution by _xeno_ · · Score: 1
      That's weird. It works as advertised on my fully patched IE (as in, all Microsoft released patches so far). It worked for me no matter what order I clicked the links. I find it kinda amusing that a patched IE may perform worse than an unpatched IE...

      It would be interesting to test this on a full suite of MS operating systems. I may have to abuse my MSDN subscription privileges at work on Monday...

      ...or not. (I'm not going to, sorry guys.)

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little relative jumps, all alike.
    46. Re:Solution by eyegone · · Score: 1


      It would be nicer still if people would take the initiative to move their business to a bank that doesn't pull stunts like this. Bank of America's web site has worked flawlessly with Mozilla for years.

      --
      "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
    47. Re:Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is a test. This is a test.

    48. Re:Solution by Dasaan · · Score: 1

      This is, of course, very true. Not to mention the ideal solution.

      In fact to be completely honest my suggestion would simply hide the problem of non-standards compliant websites. It could even hold back the very changes that need to be made by not allowing webmasters to see which browsers are being used to access their sites.

      --
      XP is basicly 98 with a lot more extra features to hunt down and disable. --Dram
    49. Re:Solution by Richard_at_work · · Score: 1

      One further thing to add. It seems IE isnt confused the first time you do it, but visit it subsequently and it displays it as you say. I have confirmed this on another 2 unpatched WinXP systems. First time loading that page and it has both urls displayed. Subsequent loads and it only shows slashdot. Wierd.

    50. Re:Solution by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      "And for those of us too cheap to buy a new browser..."

      And for those of us who are ill-informed, Opera doesn't cost a dime.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    51. Re:Solution by incom · · Score: 1

      Konqueror can do this. That's assuming you use *nix though.

      --
      True genius is grasping a situation like a peice of fruit, and peircing it just right so that it drains dry.
    52. Re:Solution by FatAlb3rt · · Score: 1

      No kidding. MBNA is willing to tell people to have Firebird to identify itself as IE...why don't they just NOT DENY a Mozilla browser?!

    53. Re:Solution by Kent+Recal · · Score: 1

      Huh?
      Last time I checked you had to pay for it or it would use a large chunk of precious pixel estate for blinky banners.

    54. Re:Solution by Prot · · Score: 1

      And for those of us who want to use Safari on the PC, just start Konqueror. It uses the same rendering enging, KHTML...

    55. Re:Solution by Kent+Recal · · Score: 1

      Are you sure the same people who would fall for such a scam would be able to decipher such a warning notice?
      I doubt it, they'll just search for the "next" or "continue anyways" button as they were trained to do by the microsoft UI.

      The warning popup is a nice idea but the wording should be much more explicit when the username/password contains patterns that look like a domain name (check for "www." and the like).

    56. Re:Solution by NanoGator · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "Last time I checked you had to pay for it or it would use a large chunk of precious pixel estate for blinky banners."

      So, in other words, yes you don't have to pay a dime for it. There's a banner that sits up there. The thing is, if you pay for it, that space isn't reclaimed for anything particularly useful. I suppose you could add a bunch more buttons up at the top, but you'd be hard press to fill it.

      I paid for Opera, and had the banner removed, and went back to using it with ads because there wasn't any other real use for it. Now Opera uses 'Google Text ads', and once in a while something interesting comes along. It's not the most frequent thing in the world, but I did find out about a couple of Lightwave books that I never knew existed.

      Ads != evil.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    57. Re:Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I sometimes identify myself as IE anyway(running on linux of course). Othertimes I identify myself as Googlebot

    58. Re:Solution by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      "And for those of us too cheap to buy a new browser, Mozilla or Firebird will have to do. "

      Opera handles this issue much better than Mozilla does. With Mozilla, you still get a URL that starts with the false domain. With Opera, you get an actual warning saying "This site has a username embedded in it, it is trying to send you to this other domain instead. Do you want to do it?"

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    59. Re:Solution by goodie3shoes · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the Zappa quote, d00d or d00dette. One of my faves. No sig is short for "no sig(nificant other)"

      --
      BSA: "Would you like a free Software Audit"? me: "No, thanks. My software is all Free".
    60. Re:Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, you don't get it. Opera is a company. A company that makes money. The people here will never support it the way they support their commie open source shit.

    61. Re:Solution by mythosaz · · Score: 1

      This is a day too late for anyone to read, but at least McAfee detects these URLs.

    62. Re:Solution by damiam · · Score: 1

      Last time I checked, Opera's already gargantuan toolbars were stretched even further by the 60-pixel-high ad. In contrast, Firebird's toolbar/tabbar/statusbar are tiny. I prefer to get the most content on the sceen possible, which is one of the reasons I don't use Opera.

      --
      It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
    63. Re:Solution by Cyno01 · · Score: 1

      I am an admited Opera fan boy. I payed for the browser, not to get rid of the ad (which only said "buy opera today"), but to support development. I have used moz and firebird and theyre certainly better than IE, but i just dont like the "feel" as much. I dont know how to explain it exactly, and it is possible to get moz or firebird exactly the same use and featurewise as opera with enough extensions (about 8) and reconfiguring all the mouse gestures to the same as opera. But i still like opera too much to switch to an OS alternative just for the sake of it being OS. My only complaint with opera is that the stumble toolbar isn't avalible for it.

      --
      "Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
    64. Re:Solution by thebackwash · · Score: 1

      There is also a browser written by a little-known company found here. (www.mammals.org.)

    65. Re:Solution by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1

      Watching ads is an expense on my part. It wastes my time and the visuals use up my brain cells to reject them as useless noise. Your attitude is precisely what makes all the spam-lords out there think they are providing a "valuable advertising service". You see my time and effort are according to them (and to you it appears) utterly worthless so the spam is free to them and costs me nothing, right? So they cannot fathom why people dont like spam. To assume that someone's time/effort, no matter how small, is worthless is not only incorrect but also insulting. Consequently, Opera is not free, it merely uses up your time/effort as payment.

    66. Re:Solution by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      You miss the point. These ads are not intrusive. Don't make assumptions about my general views while it's quite obvious I'm being very specific.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    67. Re:Solution by FFFish · · Score: 1

      OMG! The Government has been slashdotted!

      Quick -- reboot! reboot!

      --

      --
      Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
    68. Re:Solution by zcat_NZ · · Score: 1

      <!--[if IE]>
      <img src="ReallyMSIE.gif" width=1 height=1 alt="">
      <![endif]-->

      Try this on any moderately popular page. You'll be surprised how many browsers identify themselves as MSIE, but don't fetch this gif..



      --
      455fe10422ca29c4933f95052b792ab2
    69. Re:Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you serious, or are you just trying to live up to your nickname?

    70. Re:Solution by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1

      The intrusiveness of the ads influences only the amount of time/effort I expend getting rid of them. It does not alter in any degree the fundamental equasion: they are still using up my brain power and time which are not worthless. You disagree, so it appears my time is worthless to you. To follow your thinking to its logical conclusion, if spam consisted of "informative one-liner messages" it would no longer be an expense and nuisance to its recipients since now it is less "intrusive", no? What Opera does and what spam senders do is virually identical but in one regard, you have opted-in for the Opera kind which makes their brand of advertising morally acceptable but it does not make Opera free.

    71. Re:Solution by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      I would understand your view if we were talking about banner ads in web pages. We're not. We're talking about unused real-estate on a very well polished app.

      I never used the word free when talking about Opera. The only thing I've actually inferred here is that it's more than reasonable.

      I, for one, am not terribly interested in sticking to overly extreme views.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    72. Re:Solution by r_j_prahad · · Score: 1

      I always wondered what that was for. For sure one of the Opera programmers understands the K.I.S.S. concept of coding. Nice fix.

      --

    73. Re:Solution by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1

      I never used the word free when talking about Opera.

      Let me refresh your memory:

      And for those of us who are ill-informed, Opera doesn't cost a dime.

      I see now that you are attempting to weasle out of this by playing with semantics and talking about what amounts to degress of free and calling my position "extreme". Some questions result in answers that are only "yes" or "no". No "gray areas" or "degrees" are possible. In this case, either something is free (monetarilly) or it is not. It cannot be "10% free" or "90% free". Either you pay a dime (or its labour or other material equivalent) or you do not. This "well, if we make them pay in really really small amounts a lot of times they will think its free" attitude is what makes some marketing executives insert more and more advertising into for example TV programming. Granted, a lot of people have been conditioned to think that only corporations' and "professionals'" time is valuable so they put up with paying for cable channels and then watch 20 minutes of commercials every hour. Long forgotten are the days where watching advertising was considered a very steep price for watching TV and it was a marketing mantra of early cable companies who claimed that they will air much less commercials. My view is only "extremist" in society which completely surrendered to the corporate marketing agendas and now sheepishly accepts ever increasing constant stream of flashy and noisy "buy this now!" demands made doubly apalling since they now invariably arrive at the receipients (however small per unit) expense.

    74. Re:Solution by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      Um, no. You are twisting the point of my original post. I didn't say it was free, I said you don't have to pay a dime. You do not have to pay a dime to use Opera. You do not have to pay money at all. I never said that you don't pay at all. Seeing as how I'm pbviously an Opera user, it is ignorant of you to assume that I'm unaware of the existence of the ads.

      "My view is only "extremist" in society which completely surrendered to the corporate marketing agendas and now sheepishly accepts ever increasing constant stream of flashy and noisy "buy this now!" demands made doubly apalling since they now invariably arrive at the receipients (however small per unit) expense."

      Your views are exaggerated to an unrealistic extreme.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    75. Re:Solution by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      I didn't say it was free, I said you don't have to pay a dime.

      I must be having some difficulty with English language here. Please do enlighten me as to your interpretation of word "free". So you are saying it is "not free" as in "you do have to pay for it" (presumably some way measured in dimes) but "you do not have to pay a dime" as in "it does not have any monetary value" wich leads to "you do not have to pay for it" ergo "it is free"? I dont think you can have it both ways.

      Seeing as how I'm pbviously an Opera user, it is ignorant of you to assume that I'm unaware of the existence of the ads.

      I never indicated anything about you not knowing about the ads, as a matter of fact I did not even mention any of Opera's functionality or quality here. My entrie objection is to calling Opera "free" or saying that it "does not cost a dime".

      Your views are exaggerated to an unrealistic extreme.

      No, I merely have some fundamental principles and refuse to compromise on them (which would destroy their value). There are many such unalienable, fundamental principles that are universal to human kind. Many of them however get so badly in the way of some people trying to use other people that those who wish to do the using spend a lot of effort into discrediting those principles and unfortunately do so very effectively. Your insistence on making yourself free to use by advertisers is a sad testimony to this fact.

    76. Re:Solution by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      "I must be having some difficulty with English language here..."

      No, you're having difficulty accepting that you went off on me without understanding what I said originally, so you're trying to cover it up by putting words in my mouth.

      I didn't even bother reading past that. I'm happy to have a discussion about this, but not an argument. Do a little growing up, and then we'll have a friendly chat.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    77. Re:Solution by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      I didn't even bother reading past that..

      I am truly amazed at your thinking. You post a statement that can only be interpreted as I did, realize that you did not think it through and instead of correcting it you attempt briefly to defend the undefensible. Realizing the futility of it then you proceed to ad hominem attacks and since that does not work either you are taking your ball and going home.

      The punch line that I am probably going to put in my sig is "I'm happy to have a discussion about this, but not an argument". Marvellous! You are willing to discuss things as long as everyone agrees with you! Man, why did I not think of this! Its stupendous! It will change forever discussion forums and blogs like Slashdot! Thank you for this trully revolutionary idea!

    78. Re:Solution by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      "I am truly amazed at your thinking. You post a statement that can only be interpreted..."

      You're right. After you asked me about it, I replied and explained my view, yet you replied to that as if you never bothered reading that post. You can imagine my being a little frurstrated by that, right?

      "Realizing the futility of it then you proceed to ad hominem attacks and since that does not work either you are taking your ball and going home. "

      Blah blah.

      " Marvellous! You are willing to discuss things as long as everyone agrees with you!"

      More blah blah. Anything to avoid having an actual discussion, so long as you look like you're winning.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    79. Re:Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He said that you don't have to pay cash for it up front, dumb fuck.

    80. Re:Solution by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      You're right. After you asked me about it, I replied and explained my view, yet you replied to that as if you never bothered reading that post

      I went back this thread to see if there was a point where perheaps I missed something. At no time I see you indicating that Opera is not free. All I see you insisting on is that "it does not cost a dime" or that watching ads does not bother you since they are placed in some otherwise unused spot. And I keep insisting that watching ads is a form of payment that negates your "it does not cost a dime". It does not matter if the payment is actual cash upfront, monthly payments or the brain power/time that you expend ignoring the ads. If you want to say that you pay in some other forms of payment, you say "you pay for it with watching ads" or "there are alternative forms of payment" or "in addition to cash there are other options". If you are not specific noone can figure out what you mean. "It does not cost a dime" implies free from any form of payment since the whole point of money is to facilitate measurement of payments in a universal standard.

    81. Re:Solution by bonhomme_de_neige · · Score: 1

      Is it possible to disable that popup?

      I don't know why, but I find the thought of having to click through a dialog box every time someone writes a username into a link icky ... this is being touted here as an absolutely genius fix but I just thought I'd present the other side of the coin - more dialogs aren't necessarily good, and really it's only the ^A character that causes properly misleading URLs. Seems a bit blunt to fix it by doing a popup for every URL with an @. I for one wouldn't want this dialog box in my browser (but I don't use opera anyway) .. just reescaping the ^A out the way Moz does seems like the best solution to me.

      --
      "Why are you watching the washing machine?"
      "I love entertainment, as long as it's clean"
    82. Re:Solution by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      "It does not cost a dime" implies free from any form of payment"

      The post that I was replying to said that you have to 'buy' the browser, as if you have to whip out the ol credit card just to download it. Pardon me for not making my post context safe.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    83. Re:Solution by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      ...you have to 'buy' the browser...

      I now see what you meant and come to the conclusion that we speak different languages. In my world: "buy = pay = money = any equivalent of money". In yours you buy things only with cash. When I use word "buy" I mean it that it costs something and you get to pay for it and so it is not free. I believe that is what the original poster meant. You use it to exclusively indicate that you are going to use cash/credit card. And therein lies the root of the confusion ... or does it? You kept insisting later on that my stance on watching ads being a form payment is "extremist"...

    84. Re:Solution by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      "When I use word "buy" I mean it that it costs something and you get to pay for it and so it is not free."

      Too bad I said "doesn't cost a dime."

      "I believe that is what the original poster meant."

      Nope. If he meant that, he would have used the term 'ad-supported'.

      "You use it to exclusively..."

      It really is hard to determine that I use the term 'buy' exclusively when I have not even used it here.

      "You kept insisting later on that my stance on watching ads being a form payment is "extremist"..."

      I never really clarified what was extremist about what you said. What made me say that was how you treat advertising in any form as an evil force that must be eliminated.

      Blah blah blah. I think what you're really mad about is that my rebuttal to yours was modded as 'insightful', I don't think this has anything to do with confusion that common sense would have saved you from.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    85. Re:Solution by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1

      Too bad I said "doesn't cost a dime."

      So now you claim Opera is free cash or not? Again?

      It really is hard to determine that I use the term 'buy' exclusively when I have not even used it here.

      You quoted someone else and then commented on it in a way that led me to this conclusion. I admit that is just an impression I got but otherwise your entire previous argument descends into complete illogical mess.

      What made me say that was how you treat advertising in any form as an evil force that must be eliminated.

      It is only an evil force when the advertisers believe that ads have no cost to the consumer and anyone should absorb any amount of them willingly and not complain and so "ad-supported" software becomes described as "free".

      I would also like to point out that your writing seems to be turning into some incomprehensible ramblings which I cannot decipher, full of "blah blah blah"s and "my mod points are bigger then yours"...

    86. Re:Solution by Sj0 · · Score: 1

      I think you should look at just who is beneath the hood of mozilla... I'll give you a hint: If they're commies, I'll eat my hat.

      --
      It's been a long time.
    87. Re:Solution by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      "So now you claim Opera is free cash or not? Again?"

      Nice try.

      "I would also like to point out that your writing seems to be turning into some incomprehensible ramblings which I cannot decipher..."

      Sorry. I'll keep the pointing out of your flaws to a minimum.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    88. Re:Solution by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      Nice try.

      Nice try what? You are replying to me with statements that contradict each other. And when I try to get you to tell me what the heck do you mean you go "Nice try." What's next? Are you going to start saying: "When did you start feeling this way?", "Tell me more about it", "Do you like parrots?" like some half-baked AI generated Dr.Freud...

    89. Re:Solution by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      "Nice try what? You are replying to me with statements that contradict each other."

      Heh. You claimed to understand, then ya tried to drag me right back into it. Desperate to win some sort of victory, here? Nice try.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    90. Re:Solution by IgnoramusMaximus · · Score: 1
      You claimed to understand..

      Yes I thought I understood... that is until contradicted it yourself. Which threw me back in for a loop. I am beginning to suspect that you do not care what you say or if it makes sense as long as you can be the last poster in this thread. Victory? Mod points? You seem to think this is some sort of football match. These things are completely irrellevant to me, what matters is that I put forth a view that I believe in and which is not getting enough attention. And I will respond to any counter-arguments, such as yours, as long as they are sane. Since now you are not making any sense whatsoever, unless you come up with something more to add to this then talking about "victory" I shall grant you this what you seem to want the most and so after this message you can be the last poster. I really do hope that it brings you a lot of joy because if this sort of trivia is what pleases you I am afraid there are lot more essential things that forever escape your grasp.

    91. Re:Solution by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      I did not contradict myself, you sought to find that in order to keep this dumb argument going. Either that, or you are just extremely literal. I don't have the energy to try to figure that out diplomatically.

      I'm done for the night. Have a good weekend.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    92. Re:Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't have to; he just offered to do it for you.

      Pretty lucky that you don't want to write any extensions to Opera really, it being closed source and all. How many blinky banner ads do I need to look at before I get access to their source repository?

    93. Re:Solution by Dave2+Wickham · · Score: 1

      I think the %00/%01 needs to be unescaped - the raw character, rather than the % code.

    94. Re:Solution by Liselle · · Score: 1

      Absolutely. It's a single checkbox in Preferences, just like most of the other highly-configurable features. Also, it's smart, so you won't see it twice in the same session for the same un/pw.

      --
      Auto-reply to ACs: "Truly, you have a dizzying intellect."
    95. Re:Solution by hkmwbz · · Score: 1

      Opera's Google "Rads" are static text banners served by Google. No blinking, no animation, no nothing. In Opera 7.50, the ad banner is even smaller. Blinky banners indeed... It's OK to be a Firebird fan, but there's no reason to spread FUD.

      --
      Clever signature text goes here.
    96. Re:Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Mozilla is not free either. It is a product of the megacorporation called AOL, but now that Mozilla has been cut off from their previous cash supply, they now have to resort to begging for donations, rather than being honest enough to actually sell their product and back it with commercial muscle.

      So there definitely is a cost associated with Mozilla: No one is accountable for anything. They won't even back their own product commercially, but instead resort to begging for people to give them money.

    97. Re:Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Yes, it makes Opera free.

      But whatever, you seem to have forgotten that using your brain more is a good thing. The more you use it, the more training it gets, and the better it gets. But you have apparently stopped using your brain, seeing as it has deteriorated into... nothing.

    98. Re:Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Hello there commie!

      Who PAYS for Mozilla then?

      It isn't FREE as in BEER you know. They are bottom-dwelling, scum-sucking money beggars, they are!

    99. Re:Solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are an extremist, and your extremist views are probably leftist, since you are so anti-making-money. Money makes the world go round, and only commies such as yourself refuse to accept this fact.

  6. Well by Neop2Lemus · · Score: 1

    at least the scammers aren't outsourcing to India.

    --
    Needle Nardle Noo
  7. FDIC Scam by Syntroxis · · Score: 4, Funny

    Ha! Can't get my money - don't have any.

    Paul

    --
    Wherever you go, there you are.
    1. Re:FDIC Scam by flamingnight · · Score: 1

      Right, same reason I'm not worried about PATRIOT II (aka Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004).

  8. Patriot Act by MORTAR_COMBAT! · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Any law which is so powerful and ambiguous as to put fear into people by its mere mention must be a bad law. A reasonable person, if accused of violating the Patriot Act, might actually doubt his own innocence because of the sheer labyrinthian might of the Act.

    --
    MORTAR COMBAT!
    1. Re: Patriot Act by Black+Parrot · · Score: 1


      > Any law which is so powerful and ambiguous as to put fear into people by its mere mention must be a bad law.

      You refer, of course, to Barnum's Law?

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    2. Re:Patriot Act by GoofyBoy · · Score: 1, Insightful


      >Any law which is so powerful and ambiguous as to put fear into people by its mere mention must be a bad law.

      By your logic, any law with large penalties is a bad law.

      And if you aren't scared if accused of violating that type of law, you probally are more ignorant than anything else.

      --
      The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
    3. Re:Patriot Act by NFNNMIDATA · · Score: 1

      Whoever marked this Insightful is "probally" more ignorant than anything else.

    4. Re:Patriot Act by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's an acronnym ie PATRIOT.

    5. Re:Patriot Act by PPGMD · · Score: 1, Insightful
      *Probably going to get modded down for this, but what the heck*

      If you actually read the law, or at least a good honest description of the law it's not at all ambiguous, it's because of the FUD that is thrown around about it that most people don't know what it really says.

      Yes it's a powerful law, but that doesn't necessarily mean that it has to ambiguous, in some states drunken driving laws (and related penalties) are very powerful (and can basically ruin your life if caught), but no one complains, at least not nearly as much as the Patriot Act.

    6. Re:Patriot Act by Yartrebo · · Score: 1

      I think there's also the saturation effect. There's so many harsh laws that you have to prioritize. I don't like either law, but I'm going to fight the Patriot Act that I completely detest before going after a law that I just feel is too harsh, but where I agree with the basic premise of keeping drunks off the road.

    7. Re:Patriot Act by Trick · · Score: 1

      How do you figure? I'll requote the original statement: "Any law which is so powerful and ambiguous as to put fear into people by its mere mention must be a bad law."

      That is totally different than saying "any law with large penalties is a bad law." Murder, for example, has some pretty stiff penalties associated with it, but if you've broken the law, you probably know you've done it.

    8. Re:Patriot Act by tftp · · Score: 1
      but if you've broken the law, you probably know you've done it.

      And more specifically, if you haven't murdered anyone then you know that you are innocent. You don't need a lawyer to know that. But you *do* need a lawyer to find out if you violated some part of Partiot law or other. Maybe you unknowingly carried an almanac at some time... or lent $10,001 to your father and then failed to report him to authorities...

    9. Re:Patriot Act by Kohath · · Score: 1, Troll

      "Powerful and ambiguous" describes most Federal laws. The difference with the Patriot Act is the neverending partisan fearmongering and outright deception that Patriot Act critics engage in.

      Yes, lots of these laws should be repealed, possibliy including the Patriot Act*.

      ---

      This scam deceives people into fearing the Patriot Act and tries to steal their money.

      Meanwhile, leftists deceive people into fearing the Patriot Act to get them to vote for candidates. Those candidates will steal people's money by raising taxes. Then that money will be given to the leftists as government grants or funding for a particular leftist cause.

      At least the scammers don't try to kid themselves into thinking they're the good guys.

      ---

      (* Without a lot of careful study, there's no way to make an informed decision on the Patroit Act. Half of the criticisms of it are simply untrue and most of the rest seem to be exaggerations. And the law was presumably passed to solve a problem -- but I've never heard a serious alternative approach to solving that problem.)

    10. Re:Patriot Act by stewby18 · · Score: 1

      Well, I think that the parent's point is that people will freak out when accused of having broken any law with large penalties, which I think is a valid statement. I'd bet anyone would be afraid if they got a visit from the police saying, "Hey, you are a suspect in the murder of so-and-so, and would you please answer a few questions." You could know that you hadn't done it, even that you'd never heard of the person, but you can't *know* that it's not a horrible mistake that won't be fixed. Innocent people do end up convicted of crimes sometimes, and we all know it. Who hasn't heard of death row inmates who get off decades later because of DNA evidence, or other such stories?

      I would be afraid if the FBI seized my computer under suspicion of being a child pornography dealer, even though I'm not. Why? Because maybe, *just maybe*, my computer was rooted and someone loaded some on just for kicks. I'm security-concious, so I would expect the possibility to be very, very small, but I wouldn't *know*, and so with that much on the line, I would be afraid. I think anyone would be... but I don't think that child pornography laws are bad.

      You can create a similar story for anything with scary consequences, which is all the parent was trying to say.

    11. Re:Patriot Act by incom · · Score: 1

      I think the practice of giving people who admit their guilt a less harsh penalty, makes most people consider admitting guilt even when innocent, if they have any doubt of being able to prove thier innocence.

      --
      True genius is grasping a situation like a peice of fruit, and peircing it just right so that it drains dry.
    12. Re:Patriot Act by Teun · · Score: 1

      Goofy boy!

      --
      "The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
    13. Re:Patriot Act by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought the Patriot Act was just about tools available to law enforcement. Unless you are a police officer and exceed the too broad freedoms given to law enforcement in the Patriot Act, how does one violate it? Or am I missing what something about what the Patriot act is?

      Anyway, I received the email and my first thought was to ask myself how I could possibly violate the Patriot Act

    14. Re:Patriot Act by sjames · · Score: 1

      However,it is ambiguous. The reason it brings fear is that it deliberatly bypasses the checks and balances that are meant to protect the innocent. You don't have to be guilty to face a world of trouble when accused of aiding terrorists. There is nothing specific you can not do (other than not have any sort contact with anyone) in order to avoid the consequences of Patriot.

      At least with drunk driving laws, there is a specific thing you can not do to be clear of it. (That is, drive after having a drink).

    15. Re:Patriot Act by sjames · · Score: 1

      The problem with patriot is that it is much harder to even be sure. You KNOW you're not a child pornographer, but do you KNOW you haven't had contact with someone suspected to be a terrorist?

    16. Re:Patriot Act by GoofyBoy · · Score: 1

      You don't have to be a child pornographer to be charged under the laws. Posession of said material would be cause enough. How do you know you don't have material which the people involved are not under 18? In some cases the person doesn't even have to be under 18, just appear like it.

      --
      The surprise isn't how often we make bad choices; the surprise is how seldom they defeat us.
    17. Re:Patriot Act by imaginate · · Score: 1

      I don't think you're necessarily a troll as you've been modded, but come on... whose money, do you think, is getting spent by the republicans right now?

      We're deficit spending at an unparalleled rate on all kinds of "rightist" (to use your terminology) pet projects, and while we're not getting taxed on it now, who do you think is going to pay for it all (plus interest)? You could just as easily look at it as your money (and your children's money) being stolen, with you forced to pay off a loan that you never wanted to take out. But no, you're acting like fiscal responsibility -spending only money that you *have*- is a bad thing...

      From the people I've talked to, true fiscal conservatives (right or left) are just as scared by the insane borrow-and-spend methods of the current governments as conservative libertarians and "leftists" are about the freedoms that are being taken away in the Patriot Act.

    18. Re:Patriot Act by Kohath · · Score: 1

      You're right about the spending.

      I don't think deficits are a big deal at current levels, and anyone who's been paying attention has seen doomsday predictions about deficts a hundred times. The predictions don't come true. The deficits just aren't that big.

      The "spend" part of "borrow and spend" is the problem.

      The answer is to cut spending, keep cutting it until there's a surplus, then cut taxes again and start the whole process over again.

      My other point was about the deceit on the Patriot Act though. It's one thing to spend money on stuff. It's another to scapegoat and decieve and fearmonger in order to do it.

  9. Recursive by panxerox · · Score: 0

    I went thru my reply sequence: 1. Spam is bad 2. Scam is bad 3. M$/IE is bad 4. M$/IE with spam and scam is bad 5.Pakistani spammers with M$/IE with and scam is bad 6. GOTO 1 Just a shade of Godel

    --
    "It's so convenient to have a system where everyone is a criminal" - A. Hitler
    1. Re:Recursive by e.colli · · Score: 0

      This is not recursive, it's just a loop! :)

  10. Still more fun with the PATRIOT act and MS bugs by Mr.+Darl+McBride · · Score: 5, Interesting
    You can make your messages look like this to MS users: (PNG picture) and elicit fun responses like this, while your messages look normal to non-MS users.

    This is a combination of using simple X- header lines for the top error part, as well as the "'begin'-then-two-spaces" bug, which lets you create a bogus MIME section that only MS mail readers fall for -- useful for suppressing the message part. The begin-with-two-spaces trigger makes an excellent quoted text header. :)

    1. Re:Still more fun with the PATRIOT act and MS bugs by Neophytus · · Score: 1

      The begin-with-two-spaces trigger makes an excellent quoted text header. :) If you have any friends outside your GNU/geek circle then that isn't something that you want to do without pissing at least one of them off.

    2. Re:Still more fun with the PATRIOT act and MS bugs by 1010011010 · · Score: 5, Funny
      Hysterical. from the MS KnowledgeBase article:

      To workaround this problem:
      • Do not start messages with the word "begin" followed by two spaces.
      • Use only one space between the word "begin" and the following data.
      • Capitalize the word "begin" so that it is reads "Begin."
        and my favorite...
      • Use a different word such as "start" or "commence."
      Remember that, kids! Use "start" or "commence!"
      --
      Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
    3. Re:Still more fun with the PATRIOT act and MS bugs by program21 · · Score: 1

      1201(a)(3)....good choice - violating definitions for access controls ;)

      --
      This has been a test. Had this been a real emergency, we would have fled in terror and you would not have been informed.
    4. Re:Still more fun with the PATRIOT act and MS bugs by DreamerFi · · Score: 1

      Interesting, I didn't know Outlook looked at headers that way. A quick Google trip gave me nothing at all on this - can you tell me what X- header you used? I think I'm going to have me some fun this week...

      -John

    5. Re:Still more fun with the PATRIOT act and MS bugs by Mr.+Darl+McBride · · Score: 1
      If you have any friends outside your GNU/geek circle then that isn't something that you want to do without pissing at least one of them off.

      I had a couple friends get upset. Showing them the kind of control I have over their mail clients redirected the anger from me to MS, and worked as a useful tool for moving them toward SCO UNIX.

    6. Re:Still more fun with the PATRIOT act and MS bugs by salimma · · Score: 1
      Discussion archive on how to do this here.

      Have fun!

      --
      Michel
      Fedora Project Contribut
    7. Re:Still more fun with the PATRIOT act and MS bugs by DreamerFi · · Score: 1

      Excellent, thanks!

      -John

  11. Question for the mindless Republican scum by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why don't you realize that the Bush administration is destroying America?

    1. Re:Question for the mindless Republican scum by leftie_hater · · Score: 0, Troll

      Because they're not. LOL, stupid leftie.

      --

      ---------
      George W. Bush in 2004!
    2. Re:Question for the mindless Republican scum by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps you should think a bit before you spout off. The Patriot Act was rammed down the throats of the American sheeple by Republicans and Democrats alike. The American Sheeple seem to be too stupid to see the train, that is the Patriot Act, barrelling down the tracks towards them. But, the only reason the Democrats don't care for the Patriot Act is that right now it is the Republicans that are weilding it. When the Democrats gain control they too will embrace the abomination that is the Patriot act.

    3. Re:Question for the mindless Republican scum by lwsimon · · Score: 1

      I don't think this is a partisan issue actually. The "Elite" - i.e. Congress - passed the Patriot act w/o much real opposition. Yes, its bad, and its just another example of the gov't chipping away at our rights, but its NOT caused by one party or another...

      --
      Learn about Photography Basics.
    4. Re:Question for the mindless Republican scum by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When the Democrats gain control they too will embrace the abomination that is the Patriot act.

      In other words, your argument boils down to tu quoque. "If you were in control you would be doing all the bad things that I'm doing now, so you can't complain."

      You're not too smart are you?

    5. Re:Question for the mindless Republican scum by whiteknight31 · · Score: 1

      Maybee they are. Have you even read what the patriot act does??

  12. Internet Disclaimer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If everybody understood that everything on the Internet is bullshit, then we wouldn't have this problem.

  13. Use Mozilla by TheFairElf · · Score: 1

    Where's an MS patch when we really need one?
    *watches with interest from a distance and wondering why all the fuss* :-)

    1. Re:Use Mozilla by TheKidWho · · Score: 1

      because your average mom and pop dont know what the hell mozilla or opera is.

  14. Patch? by Guppy06 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "The scammers then use the already documented bug in IE that allows a site in Pakistan to get 'www.fdic.gov' to appear in the URL bar. Where's an MS patch when we really need one?"

    Right here.

    1. Re:Patch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Enough of this retarded joke. Mozilla and Firebird are shitty, clunky browsers. People who know about this bug still prefer to use IE unpatched than switch. That says a lot about how crap those other browsers are.

    2. Re:Patch? by Gilesx · · Score: 1

      "Mozilla and Firebird are shitty, clunky browsers. People who know about this bug still prefer to use IE unpatched than switch. That says a lot about how crap those other browsers are."

      No, unfortunately, it just says a lot about how retarded people are, yourself included.

      --
      Sunday you're Thinking Different, Monday you're a huge tool, paying too much and waiting to think like everyone else.
  15. 3-m@1L $c@mmz0r$ by mac+os+ken · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I will probably never understand fully why anyone would fall for an e-mail scam that is clearly not legitimate. When I get a spam telling me:

    "W3 n33d jO0r b@nk @cc0un7 # bc@u$3 FDIC $@ys $0."

    I hit delete. Unfortunately some people fall for this. Does anyone have any numbers on just how succesful these e-mails are? Is the American public that ignorant?

    --
    .deviatefromtheabsolute.
    1. Re:3-m@1L $c@mmz0r$ by hchaos · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Unfortunately some people fall for this. Does anyone have any numbers on just how succesful these e-mails are? Is the American public that ignorant?
      No, the American public is not that ignorant. Very few scams are clever enough to hook the American public. Fortunately for the scammers, the American public isn't the target. Just like the Nigerian scam, it only takes about 0.001% of the population to fall for it in order to make a lot of cash.
    2. Re:3-m@1L $c@mmz0r$ by bluGill · · Score: 1

      Sure if it is obvious. What if the scam happened to appear to come from your bank, and you normally get email from them.

      Discover sends me monthy reminders just before my bill is due, if I havn't paid yet. I'd be vunerable to an email that appeared to come from discover and just wanted me to update my personal information. I don't think I would fall for it, but if done cleaverly enough I might. (fortunatly I read email in a program which cannot launch a browser, so I have to cut and paste URLs, but given a clever enough mispessling of novus.com (discovercrd.com for instance which looks almost right, perhaps you could do better) I might fall for it.

    3. Re:3-m@1L $c@mmz0r$ by LostCluster · · Score: 1

      Just like the Nigerian scam, it only takes about 0.001% of the population to fall for it in order to make a lot of cash.

      Sending scam Spam is just as cheap as sending any other form of Spam. I'd guess these scammers are in the black if they just get one bank account cleaned out...

    4. Re:3-m@1L $c@mmz0r$ by dnixon112 · · Score: 1

      While it's probably true that these scams don't net a large amount of victims, the American public most definately is the target. When scams are tailored to look like they're from American federal agencies I think it becomes quite clear who these scammers are targeting.

    5. Re:3-m@1L $c@mmz0r$ by twistedcubic · · Score: 1

      I once got an e-mail from Ebay requesting that I upgrade my credit card info since the one on file had expired. It was a legit e-mail. Last week I got a scam email pretending to be from Ebay, asking me to update info, and I actually thought it was legit for ten seconds. The scam would have been amazingly successful if they hadn't asked for every piece of info imaginable. All a scammer has to do is duplicate legit emails, and he'll get money from people you may not consider ignorant.

    6. Re:3-m@1L $c@mmz0r$ by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 1
      I will probably never understand fully why anyone would fall for an e-mail scam that is clearly not legitimate.
      People fall for it because it looks legitimate.

      This scam isn't new either; just a few weeks ago I got some mail about updating my Citibank account (which I don't have). The mail look legit, with few (if any) spelling errors. It contained a link to some weird server, but the description of the link contained a URL to Citybank, to make it look like a URL without a description (like so: http://www.citibank.com. Heh, someone thought this scam was good, apparently. It's been translated to Dutch and spammed around, with only the name changed to a Dutch bank and pointing to a site made to look like the bank's.

      The average person doesn't know these simple tricks, nor are they aware of the bug that changes the URL shown in the address bar. Yes, the American (or glbal) public is that ignorant... you cannot expect everyone to know about this stuff.
      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    7. Re:3-m@1L $c@mmz0r$ by StenD · · Score: 1

      There'a an easy way to deal with that - never enter personal information at a site reached by clicking on a link in an email. If you get a notice that you need to update some piece of data, go to the site using the means you would reach it normally, whether that be via a bookmark or typing it in manually.

    8. Re:3-m@1L $c@mmz0r$ by Tim+C · · Score: 1

      Alternatively, 'phone their helpdesk and ask if the mail is genuine. If it isn't, they'll almost certainly want to know that someone is trying to scam their customers, so they can warn the rest. If it is, well, you've spent a couple of minutes and the cost of a phone call to get peace of mind that you're not about to be ripped off.

      Going to the site as usual is a good idea, but if you can't find the page you're expecting, you may just go back to the mail and click the link anyway, believing that you just can't find it, rather than that it doesn't exist because it's a scam.

    9. Re:3-m@1L $c@mmz0r$ by kahei · · Score: 1

      >Very few scams are clever enough to hook the American public.

      How do you explain the current government, then?

      Sorry.

      --
      Whence? Hence. Whither? Thither.
    10. Re:3-m@1L $c@mmz0r$ by StenD · · Score: 1
      Alternatively, 'phone their helpdesk and ask if the mail is genuine. If it isn't, they'll almost certainly want to know that someone is trying to scam their customers, so they can warn the rest.
      Been there, done that, received polite indifference.
  16. Obligatory SCO comment by foo(foo(foo(bar))) · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I wonder why SCO isn't warning congress about Microsoft being a thread to national security and the economy.

    I woud think that a bunch of us handing our info over to india might fall under both of those....

    1. Re:Obligatory SCO comment by MicktheMech · · Score: 1
      I wonder why SCO isn't warning congress about Microsoft being a thread to national security and the economy. I woud think that a bunch of us handing our info over to india might fall under both of those....
      There are so many threads from it, I would say Microsoft is more of a yarn.
    2. Re:Obligatory SCO comment by MortisUmbra · · Score: 1

      Yes yes, flamebait, because his joke wasnt funny and made little sense. I forgot, every SCO joke is en-vogue right now....my bad, plus its an anti-MS (sorta) joke so theres no way in hell anyone would realize it sucks....silly me.

      --

      "The saddest words of mice and men, are not those which were, but should have been."
  17. The actual article text by MillionthMonkey · · Score: 4, Informative

    Here is a repost of the email on news.admin.net-abuse.sightings.

    The link text:

    <a href="http://www.fdic.gov@202.63.206.88/index.htm" >http://www.fdic.gov/idverify/cgi-bin/index.htm</a >

    There's no point in a slashdotting/DDoS since the U.S. connectivity provider has already choked off the flow of packets to this server in Pakistan. Pinging 202.63.206.88 times out.

    1. Re:The actual article text by Jugalator · · Score: 1

      If that's true, they don't exploit an IE flaw at all. If I'm not wrong and everything before the @ shouldn't be treated as user name to login with.

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
    2. Re:The actual article text by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The ICMP packets could be dropped, it doesn't mean that all activity is choked off.

    3. Re:The actual article text by MillionthMonkey · · Score: 1

      It's not just ICMP. TCP (HTTP) connections cannot be established with this IP on port 80 (all that matters, really).

      > telnet 202.63.206.88 80
      Connecting To 202.63.206.88...Could not open connection to the host, on port 80.

      A connection attempt failed because the connected party did not properly respond after a period of time, or established connection failed because connected host has failed to respond.

    4. Re:The actual article text by Minus+Five · · Score: 1

      Mmmh... i believe you may be wrong:
      1. The IE flaw doesn't originate from the link itself; from what i can gather, when the user clicks on the link, the flaw allows to change the URL from 201.213.whatever to "www.fdic.org" in the Address bar, hence fooling the user into thinking he/she is on the FDIC site.

      2. http://[username]:[password]@www.something.com _is_ treated as a logon sequence.

      No offense intended Jug, just mentioning it for information purposes. G'day!

    5. Re:The actual article text by interJ · · Score: 1

      If you look here, you will see that they do exploit an IE flaw:

      <a href="http://www.fdic.gov=01@202.63.206.88/index.h tm">

      The part where it says =01 probably originally said %01, which causes the URL to be snapped at that point in IE and only display http://www.fdic.gov.

    6. Re:The actual article text by psychonaut · · Score: 1
      There's no point in a slashdotting/DDoS since the U.S. connectivity provider has already choked off the flow of packets to this server in Pakistan.

      What makes you suppose that everyone hoping to DDoS the server is in the US?

  18. Perhaps it's still in "testing" by Zocalo · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Where's an MS patch when we really need one?"

    Apparently they are "still working on it", just like they have been for the last two scheduled patch releases they've had. Unfortunately, the scammers and phishers are "still working on it" as well. And yet despite this, Microsoft still spouts such choice quotes about its software security as "The tool had to to be tested before we could put it on Windows Update... it would be unfair to accuse Microsoft of tardiness." (about a five month wait for an official Blaster clean-up tool) and "Windows is far more commonly afflicted with worm infections than Linux... but Microsoft offers greater accountability and support than open source alternatives".

    Well, I'll agreee with one of those points. Can you guess which? ;)

    --
    UNIX? They're not even circumcised! Savages!
  19. Finally! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Microsofts commitment to homeland security pays off.

    http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,4149,1436539,00. as p

  20. IE patch by Dreadlord · · Score: 2, Informative

    A patch was released by an open source development site for this bug, unfortunately, it turned out that the patch contained a buffer overflow and malicious code, click here for the story.

    --
    The IT section color scheme sucks.
    1. Re:IE patch by Kouiskas · · Score: 1

      I'm the patch developer and I'm really ashamed because, yes there was a buffer overflow in my patch but I fixed it immediatly and nobody out there thought about checking the source code again and relayed the fact it was flawed all around the world.
      People although thought that the patch was a spyware because it redirected to a page on openwares' server, it was not but I removed it anyway. All this thing to say the patch is clean and working and has been for a long time, and I still notice people saying it's buffer overflowed. So next time one wants to say that, please check the source code before copy/pasting what people say.

      This was a try to help the community, the only thing we got out of this is traffic to promote our website, which wasn't really succesful since we got flamed because of some flaw I removed immediatly...
      So next time such a thing happens I won't give a f___ and create the patch for me alone.

      And one last point: if you wonder why M$ doesn't make a patch, it's not a matter of testing, it's not a matter of developing the patch... It's because this "%01" thing is a trick they use with many things like Messenger/IE interactions. It's a real bad programming trick, so because they use it in many cases, they have to find a way to do the same without it. That's why they have to recode a lot of stuff.

    2. Re:IE patch by Dreadlord · · Score: 1

      then why didn't you say that in a comment to the original story? and how tf am I supposed to know unless you do so? as for the code, I don't have a windows machine to test it right now, and I don't really need to test every piece of code before linking to a /. story that says it has some sort of buffer overflow.

      --
      The IT section color scheme sucks.
  21. FDIC issues scam alert press release by LostCluster · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The real www.fdic.gov is running a rather standard press release to warn that it's a scam.

    Consumers never have any reason at all to send information to the FDIC. They already can get all they need to know out of banks.

  22. Patriot act FUD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So /. finally admits they're using a FUD campaign against the Patriot act?

  23. More important patch first... by jmlyle · · Score: 1

    I'm not to concerned about this exploit/scam/bug.

    What I demand get fixed is the fact that when I click at the bottom of the scroll bar, it scrolls two pages at a time. Who in the hell came up with that stupid idea?

    --
    I have misplaced my pants.
  24. Warning: Reuters link requires Java by Gothmolly · · Score: 1

    WTF? A Java-enabled news story? Ugh. The AP link is much cleaner, and quicker loading.

    --
    I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
  25. "Where's an MS patch when we really need one?" by Wakko+Warner · · Score: 4, Funny

    It's in the same place they put their concern for their end-users. Once you find that, let the rest of us know.

    - A.P.

    --
    "Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
    1. Re:"Where's an MS patch when we really need one?" by Kjella · · Score: 2, Funny

      I can show you where they shoved it up - but trust me, you don't want to go there.

      Kjella

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    2. Re:"Where's an MS patch when we really need one?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      I can show you where they shoved it up

      Not anymore. They shut down goatse.cx. Didn't you get the memo?

    3. Re:"Where's an MS patch when we really need one?" by zygote · · Score: 1

      > I can show you where they shoved it up - but trust me, you don't want to go there.

      I tried to see, but they took it offline :-(

      --
      the future is here, it is just not evenly distributed - w. gibson
    4. Re:"Where's an MS patch when we really need one?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I really wish you'd update your collection of shitty sigs. This guy's really needs to be added.

      I know it's a lot of hard work sifting through all of that shit, but won't you do it for the children. There's a little dying boy who told me that he loved the list of shitty sigs. Won't you do it for little Timmy?

    5. Re:"Where's an MS patch when we really need one?" by fermion · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I understand that these things take time. You have to fix the bug, go through developer testing, regression testing, and then build some full product for beta testing. The patch then has to be built for distribution. Except for the fix and the beta test, all of this should be automated.

      But the question can be asked, why is this such an issue. Why is the %01(SOH) character so special? Is there any reason why they can't just go into the code that filters the URL input and strip out all control codes. Being excellent coders, there should be a single routine that does this, and stripping out control codes(%01-%1F) should not be a problem. These appear to be control codes in Unicode as well.

      Unless they did something really stupid and are using these control codes for some nonstandard internal purpose. Which means that they have to slash and hack the code until it the bugs is fixed.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
  26. to bad i don't us IE by Bin-tec · · Score: 1

    just another reason to bank off shore and not use swiss cheese as a internet browser.

    btw, anyone got the link to the scam, we'll /. it and take it down that way. Shock and Aw slashdot style!

  27. Re:even with the patch by LostCluster · · Score: 1

    FDIC has nothing to patch, their only problem is that their name is being used without their permission. The bug is in IE, which is on the user side of things.

  28. Your picture is in the dictionary next to gullable by DrDoombender · · Score: 5, Funny
    Dear gullableguy@aol.com,

    We are with the government. You are violating the patriot act gullableguy@aol.stupiduser.com. We just want you to go to this site and give us all your compromising information because you are violating the patriot act under provision 1234. Please go to this site otherwise you will lose your FDIC insurance coverage. Please disregard the fact that if you really were suspected, the US government wouldn't actually contact you by email, and that the patriot act doesn't have anything to do with the FDIC. Oh and we would have addressed you by name instead of your email account. Oh, and other obivious and logical stuff too.

    Best regards,

    A guy who isn't pakistani

  29. security in windows by plams · · Score: 3, Interesting

    many roads lead to a safer internet expirience. mozilla, firewalls, scriptblockers.. however, the method i've found most effective is what i call "security through some old piece of crap". my mIRC client says "copyright 1995-1998", and when I asked 50+ nerds on a channel to try and DoS me, nobody could find a crack old enough! so the lesson is: don't wait for the new patch. revert to a version before the bug was even introduced.

    1. Re:security in windows by Neophytus · · Score: 1

      Incase anyone wants to try... most major releases back to mIRC 2.1

    2. Re:security in windows by RoLi · · Score: 1

      Why not just use Mozilla? There aren't any known security issues, actually there haven't been any serious security issues at all with it.

    3. Re:security in windows by Animaether · · Score: 1

      What crack are you smoking ?

      mIRC is an IRC client. The best you or 50+ nerds could do through the IRC network itself is try to flood a person*. That is hardly a DoS attack, even though your mIRC client would either
      1. Get kicked off the server for flooding with responses to such things as ping/finger/version/time requests towards those entities flooding (usually bots/clones/zombies)
      2. Slow down your mIRC as it tries to handle/display the incoming requests.

      Both of which are easily solved with a good flood protection script - later mIRC versions of course have their own flood protection.

      No, an actual DoS -might- stem from IRC users being able to see your IP address if, and only if :
      1. You are on a server that doesn't mask IP addresses.
      2. You didn't mask your IP address through server commands yourself (such as +x on UnderNET)
      3. You didn't mask your IP address through other means.

      However, this is entirely irrelevant to the IRC client of choice.

      In other words, I very much doubt it is your use of an older IRC client ( in this case mIRC ).
      I would account it to either
      A. You having a masked IP
      or
      B. Those 50+ nerds not knowing how, or lacking the resources, to launch a DoS attack.
      Though presumably it's a combination of both.

      * Although it is true that some versions of IRC clients, such as mIRC and X-Chat, are vulnerable to certain exploits. Both, in their current version, however have no known true exploits.
      ( no.. opening a DCC to somebody with a masked IP who as auto-accept, in order to receive their IP address, does not count as an exploit. )

  30. Re:Question for the tin-foil hat wearers by jbplou · · Score: 1

    This really has nothing to do with peoples feelings on the Patriot Act, it has more to do with fooling people about giving out their banking info.

  31. My patch by KalvinB · · Score: 1

    I delete any e-mails that contain those escape characters server side with a filter rule.

    Ben

  32. Re:even with the patch by jbplou · · Score: 1

    Its not on a government site you fool. Some people are exploiting a flaw in IE to fool people like you into thinking there are going to a valid site to post the data. You really shouldn't post about things you don't understand.

  33. Crap! by Keebler71 · · Score: 1

    Does anyone have the URL? I want to make sure I straighten out my account before I loose my money!

    --
    "It takes considerable knowledge just to realize the extent of your own ignorance." - Thomas Sowell
  34. Re:Question for the tin-foil hat wearers by OutRigged · · Score: 1

    Because if they're willing to take away some of the rights we've been given using the Patriot Act, what's to stop 'em from taking the rest of 'em away in the America Act or some other similarly stupidly named set of laws..

    --
    RaGe
    We're all just noise on the wires..
  35. Thank God for the Economy! by anarchima · · Score: 4, Informative

    Now that I'm unemployed, I feel more secure knowing that I have no money which can be scammed from me because of a "Patriot" Act. Thank God for the state of our Bushist economy!

    1. Re:Thank God for the Economy! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny


      Thank God for the state of our Bushist economy!

      Don't you have a SPEL CHECKER?

      That's Bullshit economy

  36. Re:Question for the tin-foil hat wearers by leftie_hater · · Score: 1

    Which rights have been taken away? What other rights are planned on being taken away?

    --

    ---------
    George W. Bush in 2004!
  37. India and Pakistan aren't 'close?' by orthancstone · · Score: 2, Funny

    The only way they could be any closer was if they touched.

    Oh...wait, they do...

  38. Re:Question for the tin-foil hat wearers by Limburgher · · Score: 4, Informative
    I know you're trolling, but hear me out. :)

    (puts on asbestos underwear)

    The Patriot act invades the privacy and tramples the civil rights of America's citizenry by allowing the DOJ and the CIA to bypass the Bill of Rights whenever they feel like it by declaring someone a suspected terrorist, or, even better, and enemy combatant. The only thing preventing the Executive branch from using this to silence political dissidents is the enormous political fallout should they attempt it. It is, in addition, transparently racist in its implementation because it is being used to focus the eyes of law enforcement on dark-skinned foreigners, while largely ignoring homegrown terrorist groups such as the Ku Klux klan, National Alliance, Posse Comitatus, and the World Church of the Creator.

    But, if none of these issues bother you, ignore me. You probably will anyway.

    --

    You are not the customer.

  39. Browser by bluewee · · Score: 1

    What do you use to replace IE for your internet browsing experence?

    --
    [blue] - The Ministry of Information approved this message...
  40. I am a victim. by The+Breeze · · Score: 4, Funny

    I lost money to a similar scam, except in my case the mail came in the form of a white envelope from the "Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service." Short verison, there were papers in there wanting to know my social security number, how much I made, what I spent it on, all of the same information from my wife...and then it ordered me to give a percentage of my income to them or else they would come and put me in jail!

    I did a bit of research and found that this money had been taken from me from some group of thugs called the Congress of the United States. Apparently, they took my money and I'm told there's very little chance of getting it back.
    They've even got my employer in on the scam - now they are paying some of my paycheck directly to them.

    1. Re:I am a victim. by e.colli · · Score: 0

      Seriously, I receive at least two or three scam mails a week saying they are from banks, central bank, government, etc. I know more than one people who gave its password bank account to scammers.

      And, with christmas, I received tons of spam e-cards with exe donwloads links and/or attachments.

      Are there the same problem?

    2. Re:I am a victim. by falsified · · Score: 1

      So you don't use roads? Water? Never used electricity in a rural area? Do you like seatbelts and the fact that automakers are required to install them? How about the fact that if you get laid off, you'll be able to eat three days later? Ever been to public school? Do you plan on, at some point in the future, being old and collecting welfare through Medicare/Social Security? No? Oh.

      --
      HI, MY NAME IS ISAAC.
    3. Re:I am a victim. by iminplaya · · Score: 1

      Never bombed, invaded other countries because they don't like your politics? Never installed friendly, but murderous dictators in said countries? Never set up South American drug cartels, because we lost control of the Southeast Asian ones? Never arrested anyone for "driving while black"? Never sold illegal arms? If you pay taxes, you're doing this and much more.

      --
      What?
    4. Re:I am a victim. by Geoffreyerffoeg · · Score: 1

      So sorry about that. I know some people who don't like this evil "Congress" gang and want to get rid of them. Of course, they live without roads, public education, choice of their own government, ability to say anything without it all being caught on tape, right not to be guillotined at a dictator's will, protection from bandits and murderers, etc. I also know some people who don't like the current gangsters in "Congress", and have realized that they're able to change the members.

      Go back to school and learn some civics. Governments cost money to run. They can only get the money from their people: this way there is an incentive to protect the people. If the government were run completely as a free-enterprise business, it would only want to protect itself, and would have no function. The goverment is the expression of the social contract. If you can't guarantee yourself that nobody you meet will steal your stuff, if you can't be sure you are the strongest person you will ever meet, it is in your interest to have a government.

      It is unreasonable to expect a government to be perfect. It is quite reasonable to expect a government system to be better than an anarchic, every-man-for-himself system. Before you start criticizing the goverment. you must promise me two things: that you voted in every election you could, and that you have a better plan than the current one.

      Look on the street and find me a criminal - someone who can be proven to be a criminal, not just by your opinion. Now look in the jail you paid to keep yourself out of, and answer the same thing. Who's responsible for managing this disparity? How much do you think it costs to maintain it? Where does this money come from? Remember the money you put in that white envelope...?

      Finally: if you're hoping that SCO loses in court, remember that your tax dollars fund the court system. Sure, SCO couldn't threaten suits without a court system, but then they'd just hire hitmen to go to your houses and kill you and sell your family into slavery.

    5. Re:I am a victim. by mabu · · Score: 1

      mod this as a troll please.. it's only funny if one has absolutely no understanding of economics or government.

    6. Re:I am a victim. by Geoffreyerffoeg · · Score: 1

      Then find me a perfect government, or a way to ensure safety in a lack of government that isn't a government itself. By the way, the perfect government can't involve humans, because humans aren't perfect; they tend to look for themselves more than for others. And it can't include anything made by humans, including robots or even general rules, because they would have imperfections from their human origin. Maybe you'd like to die? You'd see either a perfect government by virtue of God's non-human-ness, or a perfect lack of government thanks to not existing anymore. Show me a programming language in which you can't write bugs and I then will show you a perfect government.

    7. Re:I am a victim. by petabyte · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Do you plan on, at some point in the future, being old and collecting welfare through Medicare/Social Security? No? Oh.

      I have no illusions that Social Security will be there by the time I'm ready to retire (July 2047). I'm planing on being old but I'm certainly not naive enough to believe that there will be a dime left in Social Security at that point.

    8. Re:I am a victim. by bluGill · · Score: 1

      I get my own water from my own well. And it is my responsibility to make sure it is safe and drinkable. (safe is easy. However I have enough iron and other minerals that it isn't drinkable without a lot of equipment I buy and maintain)

      My local rural utility is a co-op, nobody was willing to provide power to us, so a bunch of us (back long before my parents were born) got togather and did it.

      Public school should be a local issue, get the federal government out of it.

      I've been laid off for 2 weeks now, and still eating... My dad has been laid off for 2+ years and counting, and both of us are eating. I haven't recived an unemployment check yet. My dad's unemplyment ran out over a year ago, and he still eats. Its called planing for a rainy day. I could survive several months on no income, and my dad already has. Of course eventially... But there are always jobs if you are willing to do them. I've known people to raise a family on what McDonalds pays so don't try to claim it can't be done.

      I'm not stupid enough to belive that Socal Security will every pay me anything.

      Mind you I'm not against all programs. However they are IMO far too big. I'll help the disabled. (mentially or physically), but when someone decides they are 65 so they should live off me, I don't like it. When my governemnt attacks other countries I wonder if it is worth it. (sometimes there is no choice, but I always wonder) There are some things government does well, I don't object to paying for them. However there is far too much being done by government. IMHO of course. I vote, but appearently not all voters agree, and that is life.

    9. Re:I am a victim. by falsified · · Score: 1

      I actually agree with your opinions of Social Security and Medicare. The only way those programs would ever work would be if the population remained constant, which seems unlikely due to immigration (note: I'm not against immigration either.) I'm a bleeding-heart liberal and actually consider myself a socialist, but those programs need to go. My point is, though, that it's not like the money magically disappears.

      --
      HI, MY NAME IS ISAAC.
    10. Re:I am a victim. by Kohath · · Score: 1
      Your post is an attempt to justify stealing from people. That's just FYI -- because I'm not sure you can tell.

      ---

      I'll let other people deal with the rest of your justifications, but I'll deal with roads.

      Roads are self-funding. Users of roads pay the gas tax. The gas tax pays for roads. If there were no roads, no gas would be used. No gas tax would be collected.

      If there were no income tax, there would still be roads. If there were no sales tax, there would still be roads.

      Roads are not a justification for any tax other than the gas tax. And the gas tax is completely fair, as long as the all the revenue is spent building roads.

      If you're even semi-honest, you'll leave roads out of it next time.

    11. Re:I am a victim. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you ever heard of a joke? Realized life isn't about always proving how much of a smartass you can be? No? Oh.

    12. Re:I am a victim. by Sj0 · · Score: 1

      I hate to sound condescending here, but there are a lot of countries out there that didn't do any of the things on the list...

      --
      It's been a long time.
    13. Re:I am a victim. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      So you don't use roads?

      Gas/tire taxes.

      Water? Never used electricity in a rural area?

      Yes and yes. Ever hear of a power & light bill? and actually, the power came thru a commercial utility. Not everyone out in the boonies is hooked to Rural Electric.

      Do you like seatbelts and the fact that automakers are required to install them?

      Yes, and there's an Air Force man who we all owe a debt of gratitude as he was a prime mover and shaker for seatbelts in the 50s.

      How about the fact that if you get laid off, you'll be able to eat three days later?

      I get to pay for that, too.

      Ever been to public school?

      Paid for that, too. Wish to hell they actually educated people. But that would be too much like work.

      Do you plan on, at some point in the future, being old and collecting welfare through Medicare/Social Security?

      Again, it isn't welfare. I've already paid for it. Worse, I've already put in $35-$40K into it. I do not expect to see a dime.

      Now, the point of your rant was...what? government largess comes from someone, usually the employed trying to earn a living. Oh...you thought it just came out of thin air? ah, I see...

    14. Re:I am a victim. by SpacePunk · · Score: 1

      Not only is this scam coming out of a 'district', there are several entities in the U.S. known as 'states' that perpetuate this scam.

  41. A patch is gonna fix THIS?!? by GuyMannDude · · Score: 5, Funny

    Where's an MS patch when we really need one?

    Honestly, the Patriot Act is so fucked up I doubt a simple patch will fix the problem. We'd have to throw the entire thing away and start from scratch. It's not worth salvaging.

    And further more... What? Oh. You meant a patch for IE. Okay, I got it. My bad.

    GMD

    1. Re:A patch is gonna fix THIS?!? by Dasaan · · Score: 1

      You'd trust a patch for the Patriot Act from MS?

      Worse yet you'd trust a rewrite by them?

      --
      XP is basicly 98 with a lot more extra features to hunt down and disable. --Dram
    2. Re:A patch is gonna fix THIS?!? by prichardson · · Score: 1

      IE could use a rewrite, too. Patches just can't do enough. Perhaps the government and Microsoft could do a joint "we fucked up and we're sorry" rewriting campaign. Hey, I can dream.

      --
      Help I'm a rock.
    3. Re:A patch is gonna fix THIS?!? by Dasaan · · Score: 1

      Whoa, hold on there!

      Would it be really wise to have the government get involved in rewriting a commonly used web browser/window manager/kitchen sink?
      Especially a government that thinks the "patriot act" and the DMCA amongst others are good ideas?
      It's bad enough that an American based company has a stranglehold on the global browser market, but getting the government involved too is just asking for trouble. The only way I could trust a browser written by the American, any government in fact, is if the source were freely available and I compiled it myself.

      Some call it paranoia, I call it prudence.

      --
      XP is basicly 98 with a lot more extra features to hunt down and disable. --Dram
    4. Re:A patch is gonna fix THIS?!? by kfg · · Score: 1

      We'd have to throw the entire thing away. . .

      I was with you right up to here.

      KFG

    5. Re:A patch is gonna fix THIS?!? by sjames · · Score: 2, Funny

      You'd trust a patch for the Patriot Act from MS?

      "Your law has performed an unconstitutional operation. (A)bort, (R)etry, or (B)ribe?

    6. Re:A patch is gonna fix THIS?!? by lugar · · Score: 1

      Honestly, the Patriot Act is so fucked I'd still like to hear from *ONE* person that the Patriot Act has adversely affected. Everyone that I hear bitch about it, I ask how it has affected them and they cannot answer. I even ask them to give me an example of someone they know that it's affected... Still... No answer... Amazing thing is that most of the people that bitch about it haven't taken the time to read it (it's a fairly long read, but it's worth it to quell your paranoid fears). There are checks and balances in it, contrary to what the media wants people to believe. By the way... Your tinfoil hat is on crooked, better adjust it! :P

  42. Heh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    America is a funny.

    1. Re:Heh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The truth hurts, doesn't it?

  43. Re:Question for the tin-foil hat wearers by orthancstone · · Score: 1

    They've taken away the right for you to be a complete idiot and still claim membership in the GOP (exception: if you are in office already, they'll wait till your term is done). Looks like you are screwed.

  44. Re:Question for the tin-foil hat wearers by Limburgher · · Score: 3, Informative
    Protection from unreasonable search and seizure, right to free speech, right to free practice of religion, right to counsel. Just to start.

    --

    You are not the customer.

  45. Re:Question for the tin-foil hat wearers by bluGill · · Score: 1

    Not the patriot act, but you don't have free speach within 60 days of an elections.

    Again not the patriot act, but you don't have freedom to own arms that would be perfectly suitable for a milital (like a full automatic gun, or even the more useful 3 shot burst)

    The third ammendment (IIRC... quartering troops) isn't an issue, but I'm sure you could find areas of at least grey for the rest.

    The 9th and 10th are perhaps the most violated. The federal governemtn can't set a drinking age, yet they have practily set it. And other little things like that.

  46. But by Popageorgio · · Score: 1

    Since we all use Firebird, who cares?

  47. Nasty sight by finelinebob · · Score: 5, Funny
    So if you type http://www.slashdot.org:foo@www.whitehouse.gov/ you get directed to a nasty site, even though the URL appears to say www.slashdot.org.

    Man, I thought I was going to see some nasty Goatse-thing but then ... horror of horrors!! GEORGE BUSH!! AHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!

    That was rude, man...

  48. MOD PARENT DOWN -1 Troll by LostCluster · · Score: 1

    Apparently /. has it's own version of a fake-URL issue thanks to Amazon and a rather open redirector script...

  49. Virus Scanners can pick it up by Controlio · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I don't know about the rest of you, but I clicked on a funny link from a prior Slashdot thread that had an intentionally altered URL. The big shocker was, IE parsed it like it was no big deal, but my virus scanner picked up the malicious code. It warned me that the URL was modified by a bug in Internet Explorer, and allowed me to continue or back out.

    I always swore by Norton, but from the things I've seen as of late, I think I'm sticking with Network Associates.

    1. Re:Virus Scanners can pick it up by mabu · · Score: 1

      I've moved away from Symantec and Norton as well. The newest versions of their products are very invasive and annoying. I had the program crash during installation on one computer and I had to re-install the OS to gain the use of my computer. I will not use any more Symantec products.

    2. Re:Virus Scanners can pick it up by ealar+dlanvuli · · Score: 1

      It seems to me the simpler solution is to not use the crap that gets infected to start with?

      --
      I live in a giant bucket.
    3. Re:Virus Scanners can pick it up by internewt · · Score: 1

      I don't know about the rest of you, but I clicked on a funny link from a prior Slashdot thread that had an intentionally altered URL. The big shocker was, IE parsed it like it was no big deal, but my virus scanner picked up the malicious code. It warned me that the URL was modified by a bug in Internet Explorer, and allowed me to continue or back out.

      FWIW, sophos hasn't said anything at all when I've done similar. But Sophos isn't really a "user's" AV product, its business protection. The phishing scams should be getting nailed on your mail servers, and shouldn't be getting to the user's desktop. No doubt Sophos would try and sell you their mail server AV for this :)

      --
      Car analogies break down.
  50. explanation by SHEENmaster · · Score: 1

    Aparently some people didn't understand that I was mocking the M$ patch system and requisite certifications for government use.

    I was not saying that this is the fault of the fdic, or in anyway related to fdic. I understand that fdic's computers are not involved in the translation, as the domain name is fixed.

    --
    You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
  51. Re:Question for the tin-foil hat wearers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Most of the rights granted under the Fourth Amendment, some of the rights granted under the First Amendment, and the Sixth Amendment is pretty much gone.

    I'm sure that once the rest of the First and Fourth have been gutted, then the Second will be next on the chopping block.

    Keep goin down the list, we'll likely see all of them eventually ignored.

  52. They would email you tomorrow if they could by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why assume that everyone should know this is a scam? Why assume that anyone is "fair game" because they are more ignorant than those who would like to take advantage of them?
    After all, people who lack knowledge of fundamental English grammar are still allowed to post using such constructs as "people that" when they mean "people who". Most people would still allow their posts to appear on Slashdot, even though they are in obvious need of "an education".

  53. Email is no longer usable as a legitimate means... by Teddy+Beartuzzi · · Score: 4, Insightful
    ...of contacting your customers. Every day I get so many fake emails trying to get my paypal, ebay, banking info etc, that I no longer even look at it. All correspondence that appears to be from them simply gets binned. Even the legitimate ones, because they're indistinguishable from the fakes.

    Until we all start signing our emails with PGP.

  54. Where have you been??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Have you had your head buried in the sand for the past two years? Or have you had it shoved tightly up your ass?

    If you would like proof I suggest that you turn on your evening news. If there are no reported incidents that fit the bill today then browse the archives of your local newspaper for the past few months. Everyday the Patriot Act is used to bypass the rights of normal citizens. Something, I might add, they promised never to do. "Patriot Act will never be used against American citizens." But, reality is that it already has, countless times.

    As a very minor example, before the Patriot Act a judge had to issue a warrant in order for the police to examine your banking or telephone records. The judge would evaluate the claim as to whether there was probable cause and if the search was legal prior to issuing a warrant. No longer is this true. Today, anyone with any police agency simply has to cite the Patriot act and your records will be handed over quicker than you can say Patriot act.

    1. Re:Where have you been??? by reiggin · · Score: 1

      The people like you that depend on the evening news or newsprint to provide their "proof" are the real morons. Why don't you just be a lemming and walk off the cliff already? Real proof is doing your own research instead of depending on a biased media to provide you with information. It's so funny how the same people who claim FoxNews is "biased" are the same ones who go to Dan Rather for their daily dose of truth. Get a life. Or just put your aluminum foil hat back on.

  55. Definition of Critical by Gyorg_Lavode · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Remember, it's only defined as critical if it's exploited in the wild.

    --
    I do security
  56. Re:Question for the tin-foil hat wearers by leftie_hater · · Score: 1

    Ha ha, how lame. Lucky for you they'll let any retarded idiot such as yourself into the Dummycrat party!

    --

    ---------
    George W. Bush in 2004!
  57. Well, the combined result... by Kjella · · Score: 2

    There are scams for the 0,001% with huge payouts (bank scams, 411 scams etc., simply rip-offs)

    Then there's the scams for the 0,1% with some medium payouts (mortgages, loans etc., often poor business deals but "real")

    Then there's scams for the 10%, like cheap herbal viagra and other one-off product sales, which are just a few dollars each but large in numbers.

    Also, it's about finding the blind spot. Even people who would never normally buy SPAM but then get this wonderful offer that they just HAVE to try anyway.

    You know it yourself. You might know a good price and who's a serious actor for buying a Pentium 2.8C or AMD XP 2800+ on sight, but in other areas you're at a blank. That's where spammers come in.

    Kjella

    --
    Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
  58. Re:Stupidity! by BrookHarty · · Score: 4, Insightful

    People that actually fall for this bullshit don't deserve to have a bank account in the first place. Do you honestly think the feds are gonna contact you via email to tell you that you're violating the patriot act? Go get an education.

    Lots of elderly women who outlive thiner husbands, have to deal with the finances for the first time. These people make a great targets, they are computer illiterate. They where given a computer to communicate with their family, and dont know about all the email scams. And with the new homeland security daily threat levels, it confuses them.

    Do a little research before you blame the victim.

  59. Re:Question for the tin-foil hat wearers by leftie_hater · · Score: 0, Troll

    Well, being a dark-skinned foreigner is one of several factors that may indicate a traveler may in fact be from a middle-east terrorist organization. All of the hijackers on 9/11 were dark-skinned foreigners. It'd be absurd not to take that into consideration.

    --

    ---------
    George W. Bush in 2004!
  60. Re:Stupidity! by twistedcubic · · Score: 1

    Stop being an elitist snob.

  61. Re:Stupidity! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, it's how they contacted me.

  62. Serves 'em right for using Microsoft by cabalamat2 · · Score: 1

    Microsoft software deservedly has a very poor reputation for security.

    People who continue to use it when there are plenty of alternatives, including free ones (as in speech and beer), therefore know what they've let themselves in for, and deserve the consequences they get from their misguided decision.

    (This comment entered using Mozilla running on Linux).

  63. Re:Question for the tin-foil hat wearers by Limburgher · · Score: 1
    True enough. And if we're taking country of origin into consideration, why did we not attack Saudi Arabia after 9/11? The majority of the hijackers were Saudi. Odd.

    And I DO hope you're not advocating the profiling of foreigners simply because they're foriegn or their parents or grandparents were. That's a really wide net in the country, and I don't think Ireland, China, Mexico, Canada, England or Poland had anything to do with 9/11. But I digress. . .

    --

    You are not the customer.

  64. The actual text from the mail by Minus+Five · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here's the text that prompted me into give away my personal info :)

    Important News About Your Bank Account

    To whom it may concern;

    In cooperation with the Department Of Homeland Security, Federal, State and Local Governments your account has been denied insurance from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation due to suspected violations of the Patriot Act. While we have only a limited amount of evidence gathered on your account at this time it is enough to suspect that currency violations may have occurred in your account and due to this activity we have withdrawn Federal Deposit Insurance on your account until we verify that your account has not been used in a violation of the Patriot Act.

    As a result Department Of Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge has advised the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation to suspend all deposit insurance on your account until such time as we can verify your identity and your account information.

    Please verify through our IDVerify below. This information will be checked against a federal government database for identity verification. This only takes up to a minute and when we have verified your identity you will be notified of said verification and all suspensions of insurance on your account will be lifted.

    http://www.fdic.gov/idverify/cgi-bin/index.htm

    Failure to use IDVerify below will cause all insurance for your account to be terminated and all records of your account history will be sent to the Federal Bureau of Investigation in Washington D.C. for analysis and verification. Failure to provide proper identity may also result in a visit from Local, State or Federal Government or Homeland Security Officials.

    Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter.

    Donald E. Powell
    Chairman Emeritus FDIC

    John D. Hawke, Jr.
    Comptroller of the Currency

    Michael E. Bartell
    Chief Information Officer

    1. Re:The actual text from the mail by mr_infiniti · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The wording and grammar are very good; very authoritative looking - almost too good for originating in Pakistan. This makes me wonder if this is an actual government form letter that perhaps was received by someone targeted by the Patriot Act, that has now been manipulated to serve their own needs. Does the FDIC actually do this to people? Is suspending account insurance part of an existing govn't process?

      I'm not centering-out Pakistan for any discrimination here, but isn't this where Osama is thought to be holed up? It would seem terribly ironic if a process meant to disable terrorists' finances is being exploited for financial gain by the same terrorists.

    2. Re:The actual text from the mail by ergo98 · · Score: 1

      This makes me wonder if this is an actual government form letter that perhaps was received by someone targeted by the Patriot Act

      I doubt it. Personally I find the letter amateur, and with a definite scam-vibe (although obviously I already knew it was a scam, but I feel I would have thought the same if I'd seen this before the publicity).

      Firstly, it's highly redundant. By saying that I mean that it's redundant. It's redundant in its redundancy that is redundant. You get what I mean by saying that it's redundant?

      Secondly, the final paragraph sounds absurdly fake -- in the intro you're told that your account has had suspected "currency violations", and they need to verify that these currency violations aren't in violation of the Patriot act -- so they ask you to verify your account information? How would that disprove violations of the Patriot act?

      While it's much better than the classic scam, this whole letter reeks of being a scam. Of course for those on the fence with reasonable doubt, the bloody IE bug may have put them over the fence towards believing, which is sad.

    3. Re:The actual text from the mail by LostCluster · · Score: 1

      Does the FDIC actually do this to people? Is suspending account insurance part of an existing govn't process? There's no way an individual can lose their FDIC insurance. The FDIC doesn't have insurance for people directly. The FDIC insures that the obligations of the bank will still be honored even if the bank fails. Which means, if your bank goes down, the FDIC will step in and bail out the operation. The FDIC has no need to even care who the depositors are unless and until that event happens.

  65. serial by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    And for those us who are cheap little pirates who Opera ad-free FOR FREE:

    $ ~/dl/opera/eps-opera_keygen
    Opera 7 (linux) keygen by magnolia^EPSiLON

    Serial: u-KcCiL-vCknS-hSE3U-8k8bd-km4sB

    1. Re:serial by Jo+Owen · · Score: 1

      Why question to you is why?

      You obviously think opera is a fine browser, otherwise you wouldnt use it, so why do you insist on depriving opera of the funds it needs to keep the development going?

      What a fucktard.

    2. Re:serial by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      opera dont have no paypal donate button!!!!! thats why!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    3. Re:serial by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That....was the stupidest comment I've ever heard. In none of your insane rambling did you come close to ever forming a coherent thought or message. You will not get modded up, and may god have mercy on your soul.

      (and no, it's not a direct quote, bite me.)

    4. Re:serial by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think he was making fun of Mozilla begging for donations through paypal rather than being decent enough to actually sell people a product and stand behind it/support it.

  66. The REAL solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bah, don't waste your time with that candy-coated Apple crap, or that bug-filled Microsoft junk. *This* is all you need to browse any web site with confidence. And it won't cost you a penny.

    Wimps.

  67. Australias response: Commonwealth Bank by |>>? · · Score: 4, Informative

    Yesterday I received a message that appeared similar in nature to that described by the article. After many phone calls I managed to speak to the fraud section at the Commonwealth Bank (biggest bank in Oz), where the message appeared to come from.

    Their solution (after getting some of the bank staff to pull their head from the sand) was to redirect all requests to a specific URL to the Bank's home-page.

    Now I for one, think that the only way that they could do that, was with cooperation from ALL ISP's in this country.

    The scam and the banks initial response pissed me off, but the redirect scares the *shit* out of me.

    Anyone else share my concerns, or should I just crawl back into my box and live with the idea that the Internet has just died...

    --
    |>>? ..EBCDIC for Onno..
    1. Re:Australias response: Commonwealth Bank by LostCluster · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Actually, it doesn't need very many ISPs to cooperate... just the ones that operates the trans-continental links that are between where you are and where the scammer is. They just have to set up one of their own servers to be the "bad" IP address and feed redirects, and then set their routers to intercept all traffic destined for that IP address.

      I'm pretty sure everyone who provides Internet connectivity to places that are scam havens are used to doing this.

    2. Re:Australias response: Commonwealth Bank by TPFH · · Score: 1

      it doesn't need very many ISPs to cooperate... just the ones that operates the trans-continental links that are between where you are and where the scammer is.

      Then can they re-direct it to a page that says "You are an idiot. Never trust anything in an unsolicited email." ?

      --
      This signature used to contain a cute kitty virus with ansii art. Please set the slashdot editors on fire. Thank you
  68. Says a lot about the Patriot Act by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Lol. So the Patriot Act is so widely understood to undermine civil liberties and privacy that a scam in its name is likely to be perceived by many as credible. Pretty damning of the Patriot Act.

  69. Re:Question for the tin-foil hat wearers by Max+Threshold · · Score: 1

    Being from a white, middle-class American family won't stop me from becoming a terrorist if they take any more of my rights away. Put that in your pipe and smoke it!

  70. Re:Stupidity! by LostCluster · · Score: 1

    Futhermore, such a demographic has all of their money in savings accounts and they remember exactly why the FDIC exists, as a never-let-that-happen-again fallback to the banking crisis of the Great Depression. These people have absolutely no risk tolerance with their money, so even an unclear threat to their FDIC insurance is something that causes them to pay attention.

  71. good timing! by Transcendent · · Score: 1

    This spam-related story involving a bug in a microsoft product gets posted right above another story titled "Bill Gates Forecasts Victory Over Spam"

    It just can't get any better

    1. Re:good timing! by Almost-Retired · · Score: 1

      Damn, and here I thought I was the only one to notice that. There goes my karma for the day, right in the toilet.

      Cheers, Gene

    2. Re:good timing! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To forecast is to say what is GOING to happen, not what IS happening or HAS happened.

  72. Re:Question for the tin-foil hat wearers by leftie_hater · · Score: 0

    It will if they monitor posts on slashdot like yours.

    --

    ---------
    George W. Bush in 2004!
  73. Why Patch? by Foofoobar · · Score: 1

    This is just Microsoft's way of saying 'Use Mozilla'. :)

    --
    This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
  74. Why this is not a big deal by deacon · · Score: 1, Offtopic

    Because I am reading my mail in Pine, with headers turned on, so I see all the false links and other standard spammer bullshit.

    Because I only communicate with banks by snail mail or the telephone. The amount of money in the bank is too important to be left to an insecure transmission medium (yes, I mean email)

    Because I am using mozilla, and so all the pinheaded hacks aimed at Internet Exploder just bounce off.

    Because I will never act upon information I get from an email from an unknown person.

    Oh yes, spammers, I do forward your fraudelent emails to the abuse department of the bank involved. Since you put the banks' real URL inside your spam, and since I see that in Pine, I have no problem going to the banks real website and submitting your crap.

    By the way, did you know that it takes harvesting 35 spammers to collect the 4 lbs of brains to make Spammer Brain Stew? (Serves 4)

    Recipe:

    Spammer Brains Stew Recipe

    * 2 slices bacon, diced * 3 tablespoons flour * 1 teaspoon salt * 1/2 teaspoon pepper * pinch cayenne * 1 (4-lb) Spammer Brains, cut up (with testicles if desired) * 3 onions, thinly sliced * 4 tomatoes, chopped * 1 red bell pepper, chopped * 1/2 teaspoon dried thyme * 2 cups lima beans, fresh * 2 cups corn kernels * 1/2 cup okra, sliced * 2 tablespoons chopped parsley * 1 tablespoon Worcestershire sauce
    Cook bacon in its own fat until rendered. Remove the bacon bits and set aside. Combine flour, salt, pepper and cayenne and dredge the brains. Peel the testicles. Brown the pieces in the rendered fat with the onions. Add 1 1/2 cups boiling water, tomatoes, red pepper and thyme to Crock Pot with meat. Cover and cook Spammer Brain Stew on LOW 6 to 8 hours. Add remaining ingredients including reserved bacon, cover and cook Spammer Brain stew on HIGH 25 minutes or until vegetables are tender.
    1. Re:Why this is not a big deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You forgot an imporant part of the preparation:

      Peel the testicles, brown them in the rendered fat, then remove them from the spammer with a dull knife.

    2. Re:Why this is not a big deal by Almost-Retired · · Score: 1

      Damned idiot, what a way to promote the human equ of mad cow disease, the one I can't spell but its just as lethal. Shortened to C-J IIRC.

      Those spammers all have it already but just don't know it. I think its what makes them spammers in the first place.

      No Cheers, just jeers, Gene

    3. Re:Why this is not a big deal by deacon · · Score: 1

      I regret my error. :)

    4. Re:Why this is not a big deal by deacon · · Score: 1
      No, I don't think that the spammer are blameless as a result of mental problems, as you seem to suggest.

      Anyway, there is no bag limit on spammers at the moment, and I don't think they are going to be endangered, so go hunting.

      :)

    5. Re:Why this is not a big deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow. You, my friend, are the biggest chode I have ever met. I wouldn't be surprised if you 1) Wear coke-bottle glasses 2) Are slightly cross eyed 3) Spit when you talk 4) Have no friends 5) Collect Hentai 6) Wear velcro shoes.

  75. Re:Stupidity! by brain_not_ticking · · Score: 0

    That's a good point actually - I often overlook the elderly. Although, my elderly grandmother HATES computers with a passion. She almost definitely will outlive my grandfather, but I don't think she will ever bring herself to use a computer. Even so, the elderly, more than anyone else, should realize that there is little, or no correlation between an email address and a bank account. The internet most likely didn't even exist when they got their bank accounts. I realize that with all of the electronic banking that happens now, people could be duped by such a scam, however, any well informed individual would know that email is NOT a secure communication method and would NEVER transmit such sensitive information over an insecure protocol. So I believe my point still stands. Get an education.

  76. there is already a patch for the ie bug by Indy1 · · Score: 1

    its called mozilla. Also fixes all spyware problems as well as cookie problems. Its time to give up on ie and start over. Fortunately the mozilla team makes this painless.

    --
    Lawyers, MBA's, RIAA? A jedi fears not these things!
  77. THANK GOD WE'RE SAFER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From the terrorists. Too bad they're using our own laws against us. Let's make them way more restrictive and they'll be shut down!

  78. Ways around the problem. by MortisUmbra · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Someones comment above made me think about how you could possibly lessen the effects of attacks like these. They mentioned that one of the US providers lines cut access to the IP in question. Indeed its no longer pingable.

    But how long does it take for word to reach them about that?

    What I was thinkingwas, a sort of P2P network client that could actively collect IP's from sites like this and, while not outright blocking them (so the next legit user of that IP isnt screwed) could at least sit in a ZoneAlarm-like position on your system and monitor the IP addresses you try to connect to, if it matches the outgoing IP to one on the list, it throws up an error like "Warning! This IP may contain fraudulent information or be dangerous to your computer, only proceed if you are absolutely certain this site is safe!".

    The P2P aspect would be nice because once new scams are caught in the wild (honeypots might be a very usefull tool to help catch them fast) users/admins could update the list (though some sort of peer review would almost certainly have to be in place to avoid abuse) and could redistribute itself amongst the network.

    Idealy this should not have to be the case, but as in the above example, its not really a "bug" per-se because if you look at it, its quite obvious what they are doing, just the same there should be some way of preventing this kind of thing reaching the uneducated masses. Even 0.001% of the pop. falling for this kind of thing is unacceptable, and will only fuel people like this.

    Anyway, commence poking my idea full of holes :) I'm sure there is plenty, its just an idea. :)

    --

    "The saddest words of mice and men, are not those which were, but should have been."
  79. here's a fix by MoFoQ · · Score: 1

    Don't use IE!
    use mozilla/firebird (should be the official browser of /.) or opera.

    Just like how soldiers during the Vietnam war would ditch their faulty M16's and grab the VC's Chinese-made AK's, no one should be using a faulty tool, period.

  80. This bug is spreading everywhere it seems by Googo · · Score: 0

    Contents of e-mail I received:

    Dear yahoo Paydirect user, thank you for using our system. We kindly ask you to edit some information within your Paydirect account, due to our new policy rules and improved protection matters. Please click here and follow the instructions .

    Paydirect Administration

    Link that was prvided was:
    http://paydirect.yahoo.com%01%01%01%01%01%01 %01%01 %01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%0 1%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01% 01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01 %01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%01%0 1%01%01%01%01%01@69.15.6.126/f/

    If you have IE, you can test see how it masks the real address.

  81. Re:Stupidity! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe the victim is not completely at fault, but part of the fault is hers. When she was younger she shouln't have accepted the sexism that pushed her into helplessness. As she grew older she should have examined herself and her society and asked questions when she didn't know how, what, when, where or why something was the way it was.

    And she definitely should have asked questions about the computer and email when she got it. The hacker creedo of "How does that work?" would have served her well.

  82. Non-News by Saeed+al-Sahaf · · Score: 1

    If this non-news, standard issue spam, had not included "Patriot Act" FUD, it would have never made Slashdot. People, it's run-of-the-mill spam. Delete it and move on.

    --
    "Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
  83. Hopefully, anyone would call their bank... by Huogo · · Score: 4, Informative

    Banks get notified of tons of things like this every day (I work in one), and all the tellers should know of the scams. Before you do anything involving your bank account, call your bank!

    We also get memos telling us NOT to let Bin Laden or Saddam open accounts... allong with a list of the US Government's top 100 most wanted. I'm still not quite sure how we're suppossed to memorize all those names...

    1. Re:Hopefully, anyone would call their bank... by the+pickle · · Score: 1

      We also get memos telling us NOT to let Bin Laden or Saddam open accounts... allong with a list of the US Government's top 100 most wanted. I'm still not quite sure how we're suppossed to memorize all those names...

      Ideally, your bank would have a list of names to flag when someone starts going through the account setup process. Tellers and other bank employees shouldn't HAVE to memorise all those names; that's what computers are for.

      Unless your bank still uses ditto machines and carbon copies in triplicate, done by typewriters, for everything...

      p

    2. Re:Hopefully, anyone would call their bank... by Huogo · · Score: 1

      You'd think, but I'm just a teller, I don't have a say in those things. There are quite a few stupid things in our system, that will probably never get changed. I shouldn't go into details though, bank security and secrecy and all (yeah, its paranoid, but if on the off chance something did happen, and it came back to me, I could be in a heap of trouble).

  84. In other news by JGski · · Score: 1

    ...Microsoft repeated its denial that the Windows monoculture is a threat to national security.

  85. There's something else doing it too by Fez · · Score: 2, Informative

    When I first heard about this bug I put a body_check in Postfix to block messages containing the offending code. In the past 24 hours it's blocked 40 messages that tried to exploit the bug but none were this FDIC scam.

    The virus is faked as coming from "security-center@microsoft.com" and it tries to send the user to http://www.microsoft.com%01@d2341647.u35.worldispn etwork.com/update/ which loads a microsoft page in one frame and in another frame attempts to download a file of type application/hta.

    I have yet to find information about this on any of the major Virus Scanners' websites. Anybody know more about it?

    1. Re:There's something else doing it too by Fez · · Score: 2

      Hate to reply to myself, but I did find more out through actually downloading and opening the file from that site. It downloads and runs a VBScript file that writes an EXE to the root dir of C: (C:\2.exe) and then runs it.

      I'll leave actually executing the 2.exe file to someone else :)

  86. Re:Question for the tin-foil hat wearers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The 2nd ammendment was created so that people like the person who wrote parent to your post won't have to worry if he is monitored by a government that he doesn't agree with.

  87. OT - Re:Warning: Reuters link requires Java by CowboyBob500 · · Score: 1

    I opened it 'cos I'm curious. Looks like the first of the "broadband" ads - at least that I've seen. For Fisher something or other, I ignored it, but it was a video of a guy talking crap about his investment company. Pity the poor modem user...

    Bob

  88. Re:Crap! Prime Example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    DEAR GOD! MY EYES!

  89. Already available by cgenman · · Score: 1

    Just download mozilla.exe, and patch your system properly.

    NPR ran an article about the hole in I.E. friday morning, yet never mentioned that the hole was in Internet Explorer, (just in "the internet"). They also never mentioned that alternatives were available. It's sad when people have become so indoctrinated in a product that they don't even realize that they are using one.

  90. Re:Your picture is in the dictionary next to gulla by aardvarko · · Score: 1

    Or perhaps 'gullible'?

  91. Stupid mistakes by t_allardyce · · Score: 1

    I think its pretty safe to say, that if Microsoft cant make web browsers, then what chance do they have of making web servers? given that in the past few years they have managed to make countless cock-ups in the areas of allowing scripting languages to access more than they should, and not properly implementing formats including HTML, CSS, and PNG! Really guys, its not that difficult.

    --
    This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
  92. AND ambiguous by g8oz · · Score: 1

    >By your logic, any law with large penalties is a bad law.

    No.

    He said laws with large penalties AND ambiguity.

  93. IMPORTANT INFO ON THIS SCAM! by fzammett · · Score: 1

    This is only one variation of the scam! This morning I got an eMail saying essentially the same thing as this one, but is was talking about my Visa account. It said it was from Visa (not the actual company that holds my Visa accounts, big difference). Needless to say I didn't click a thing, but I did take a peak at the guts of the message, and I believe this is a variation of the same thing.

    I haven't seen this reported anywhere else, I frankly didn't think anything of the eMail because after all, with all the spam I get and either don't open or glance at and send to the deleted folder immediately, what's one more? But when I saw this posting, I took a look at it again, and I think it's worth everyone being aware that there seems to be variations on a theme here.

    IF you are the type of mind that might have been fooled by one, beware the other, and any other variations that might come along too!

    --
    If a pion (n-) collides with a proton in the woods & noone is there to hear it, does lamdba decay into the source pa
  94. We? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    "Where's an MS patch when we really need one?"

    Who "We?"
    Not me.

  95. Another workaround until IE gets patched. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    This browser toolbar isn't spyware and detects the spoofing...

    http://www.dejasurf.com/help/spoofwarn.html

  96. Stunning irony by ediron2 · · Score: 1
    a circulating e-mail scam that claims that people will lose their FDIC bank account insurance because they are suspected of violating the Patriot Act unless they confirm their bank account information with a website. The scammers then use the already documented bug in IE that allows a site in Pakistan to get 'www.fdic.gov' to appear in the URL bar

    Man, talk about irony. The Patriot Act is indirectly responsible for a scam that could be funding terrorist anti-American factions. This is even funnier than the Bush/Cheney administration's 'drugs=bad, arab oil=good' dichotomy...

    (disclaimer: yes, I'm aware it could be pro-American pakistanis behind this fraud. Heck, they're obviously capitalists and have the ethical flexibility to do well in American corporate boardrooms.)

  97. Mozilla by paj1234 · · Score: 5, Informative

    A lot of people here have suggested Mozilla as a solution. That is a partial answer. But a proper solution has not been implemented yet in Mozilla. See Bugzilla bug 122445, "Spoof prevention: Warn if username/password in link (url) looks like a hostname". The bug has been outstanding for two years now and it's still not been fixed in Mozilla. There is a proposed patch planned to go into 1.7a.

    For the full discussion see: http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=122445

    1. Re:Mozilla by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Like many such bugs, one of the major reason it hasn't been implemented is that many of the developers are strongly against the idea of popping up dialogs - they say users either ignore them or find them annoying.

  98. Openwares seem to have their fix sorted now by eamacnaghten · · Score: 1

    I believe www.openwares.org have a fix for this IE bug now working correctly - it was originally badly written (complete with buffer overflow!) but I think they have now addressed all issues.

    It is released with source under GPL (or similar) at their site.

    (PS - I have nothing to do with openwares)

    --

    Web Sig: Eddy Currents

  99. Re:Question for the tin-foil hat wearers by benna · · Score: 1

    hear hear!

    --
    "It is not how things are in the world that is mystical, but that it exists." -Ludwig Wittgenstein
  100. something not quite on topic but necessary i think by bbelt16ag · · Score: 1

    hey peeps my first post YAAA ! well i was watching a very eye opening movie called the "truth and lies of 9/11" its about the evil in the administration right now and in the stock market and corporation around the world. i fell like its is important that every geek read this since it ties in to some of the patriot act and legilation that we all hate. it will help the geeks and non geeks have a closer allience on the issues of privacy and information trading. please atleast watch the video it is on http://www.forum2.hawkies-world.com/index.php thank you for your time and interest. if you can post this on the main page if would be appericated :)

    --
    NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER GIVE UP! "No limitations, no boundaries, there is no reason for them."
  101. Re:Your picture is in the dictionary next to gulla by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did you know that "gullable" is not a real word? Seriously, look in the dictionary -- it's not in there. Strange but true!

  102. RE: not the point.... by King_TJ · · Score: 1

    Look, I *do* use water every day, as well as the roads pretty much each day, and of course I use electricity. Do I think these things would just vanish into thin air without paying income tax to the U.S. govt. though? Nope!!

    If all the money siphoned from my paychecks was invested into mutual funds/stocks/etc. instead of forcibly placed in the horrible investment called "Social Security" - I'd be MUCH better off when I finally retire.

    We already (hopefully) believe in the concept of "supply and demand" ... Why does this have to go away when it comes to issues like our roads? If people find the roads and highways useful, we'll be willing to pay for their care and maintenance by private companies. (Heck, this might even encourage a little more fairness in the respect that businesses dispatching 18-wheelers all over the country could pay a higher road maintenance fee than the average citizen driving a small car! Right now, I feel like my taxes going towards the roads are paying largely for damage done to them by large trucks and buses.) Same with electricity and the rest of the utilities. I think we might see some really interesting things happen if we opened them up to competition. Maybe we'd have small, local electric power companies that actually *cared* about their customers? Where I live right now, AmerenUE sure doesn't! They let the trees entangle the power lines and cause regular outages, and their attitude is "We'll worry about fixing it when it goes out. We don't have the money to keep paying tree trimmers to prevent it." I had a power line going in to my house that wasn't even insulated. Every time it got windy and rainy, you could see the thing touch a tree and create a shower of sparks. I complained numerous times and they told me they wouldn't do anything about it unless the line actually snapped.

  103. The actual email by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    To whom it may concern;

    In cooperation with the Department Of Homeland Security, Federal, State and Local Governments your account has been denied insurance from the Federal
    Deposit Insurance Corporation due to suspected violations of the Patriot Act. While we have only a limited amount of evidence gathered on your account at
    this time it is enough to suspect that currency violations may have occurred in your account and due to this activity we have withdrawn Federal Deposit
    Insurance on your account until we verify that your account has not been used in a violation of the Patriot Act.

    As a result Department Of Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge has advised the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation to suspend all deposit insurance on
    your account until such time as we can verify your identity and your account information.

    Please verify through our IDVerify below. This information will be checked against a federal government database for identity verification. This only takes
    up to a minute and when we have verified your identity you will be notified of said verification and all suspensions of insurance on your account will be
    lifted.

    http://www.fdic.gov/idverify/cgi-bin/index.htm [202.63.206.88]

    Failure to use IDVerify below will cause all insurance for your account to be terminated and all records of your account history will be sent to the
    Federal Bureau of Investigation in Washington D.C. for analysis and verification. Failure to provide proper identity may also result in a visit from Local,
    State or Federal Government or Homeland Security Officials.

    Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter.

    Donald E. Powell

    Chairman Emeritus FDIC

    John D. Hawke, Jr.

    Comptroller of the Currency

    Michael E. Bartell

    Chief Information Officer

    1. Re:The actual email by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It actually has hard
      's at the end of the lines. It wraps perfectly at 1024x768, but looks bad on other resolutions.

    2. Re:The actual email by tsa · · Score: 2, Interesting

      They start the letter with To whom it may concern. Then I would think that if they don't even know my name, why should I trust them to know anything about my account? Ergo: it's spam. There should really be a mandatory Internet Safety Course for people who go online the first time. It's easy to be impressed by letters like this but also easy to learn how to distinguish between 'trusted' e-mail and spam like this.

      --

      -- Cheers!

    3. Re:The actual email by operagost · · Score: 1
      It's also redundant.

      "While we have only a limited amount of evidence gathered on your account at this time it is enough to suspect that currency violations may have occurred in your account and due to this activity we have withdrawn Federal Deposit Insurance on your account until we verify that your account has not been used in a violation of the Patriot Act."

      "As a result Department Of Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge has advised the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation to suspend all deposit insurance on your account until such time as we can verify your identity and your account information."

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
  104. What's widening this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is there a clever page-widening post in here that I didn't see? The page is wide.

  105. damn by SQLz · · Score: 1

    This bug has been known for months, probably years by some. How hard can it be to fix!?

  106. Re:Email is no longer usable as a legitimate means by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    ...of contacting your customers.

    Was it ever? I mean, I've been using postcards and pencil for my own business dealings forever, but even I know that email has been easier to forge than "X" and easier to intercept than Peyton Manning since shortly after its invention.

  107. TEXACO! by Behrooz · · Score: 1

    Texas interchangable with Mexico because they once used to be a part of the same country?

    In fact, President Bush is working to ensure that we can use the term "Texaco" to describe ownership of the entities formerly known as Mexico and Texas.

    Either that, or he just muffed his pronunciation again...

    --
    "We have to go forth and crush every world view that doesn't believe in tolerance and free speech." - David Brin
  108. Re:Your picture is in the dictionary next to gulla by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ha, what a gullable person!

  109. Re:Your first post by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am interested in purchasing your (First Post ) which price is ($2500)
    and don't worry about the shipping agent I have a shipping
    agent that will carter for the shipment I have a client in US who
    is owing me ($7000). And he has promise that he will be sending the
    certified cashier check down on my behave, I want you Have it in mind
    that the remaining balance of the excess fund will be wire via money
    gramm to the shipping agent who is coming for the pick up. If this
    mode of payment is accept by you I will like you to send your Full
    name and address including your cell phone number in which you will
    Receive a certified check drawn in U.S funds.
    Regards.
    I WILL BE WAITING FOR YOUR IMMEDIATE RESPONSE.

  110. Cure for IE Bugs by Andrew1963 · · Score: 1

    The easiest cure for IE troubles is to nuke it off your system. I use Mozilla instead.

  111. Mod me redundant but: by Xenothaulus · · Score: 1
    MO.ZILL.A.

    Or Firebird. K? k.

  112. How to shift the tax burden to trucking companies by tepples · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Right now, I feel like my taxes going towards the roads are paying largely for damage done to them by large trucks and buses.

    What's their fuel consumption compared to that of your car? Once the more efficient hybrid car models show up on the used market in a couple years, they'll begin to take off among individual drivers. Less money spent on gasoline by individuals will shift the tax burden to those who buy fuel for large trucks and buses. In addition, large trucks and buses tend to run on diesel, and the government could tax that more than gasoline.

  113. About a five month wait for an official Blaster... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When the patch was released a month before the attack it is hardly microsoft's fault if others don't guess what.

    Patch.

  114. I wonder... by deepvoid · · Score: 1

    Could this be a new way to find Osama? Maybe some of his buds are using this to creatively finance more acts of terrorism. Probably a stretch, but what the heck, could be worth investigating.

    --
    Fast machines, powerfull AI, impulsive invention,... All I lack is a good espresso machine!
  115. Re:Your picture is in the dictionary next to gulla by Lenolium · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You're right, just check right here

  116. Has anyone posted a workaround yet? by popupcop · · Score: 1

    It appears at first glance to be pretty straightforward. I spent about 10 minutes inside a preexisting toolbar control and had a pretty reasonable workaround for this bug, at least the flavor that is documented.

    I then spent a couple of hours starting to work this up into an installable, shippable BHO (Browser Helper Object).

    If no one else has posted a workaround for this problem, I will spend the 8 or so hours necessary to work this into installable, releasable state. The work is mainly professional "fluff" - making a reasonable installer/uninstall script, getting the icons right, writing the download Web page, putting in a link to some Web pages with help, putting the appropriate CopyLeft comments into the source files, etc...

    Oh, and the source to the BHO will be made available....

    But, I don't want to waste my time if someone has already done this....

    1. Re:Has anyone posted a workaround yet? by popupcop · · Score: 1

      Oops.

      Just found the patch...

      Never mind...

  117. Says a lot about the public by MacWiz · · Score: 1

    More damning of the general intelligence of the American public.

  118. Re:Question for the tin-foil hat wearers by orthancstone · · Score: 1

    LOL, good one buddy. Keep trying, you'll find good material some day. Until then, keep voting Republican all you like...by your obvious lack of brains to come up with a good comeback, I know you'll never be within the ranks of the elite; therefore I know your party will never have any respect for you.

  119. INSTALL THE DAMN PATCH !!! by Vishal+Kapoor · · Score: 2, Informative

    /. users need to keep their eyes open for patches!! The patch was releasd some time back and /. did a story on it too. OpenWares.org Look for the IE patch. It was released Dec 2003 "This patch addresses a vulnerability in Microsoft Internet Explorer that could allow Hackers and con-artists to to display a fake URL in the address and status bars. The vulnerability is caused due to an input validation error, which can be exploited by including the "%01" and "%00" URL encoded representations after the username and right before the "@" character in an URL. "

    1. Re:INSTALL THE DAMN PATCH !!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Scanning for updates..

      There are no critical updates available at this time.


      There you have it..

    2. Re:INSTALL THE DAMN PATCH !!! by Vishal+Kapoor · · Score: 1

      I know MS has not released anything for this, but if someone else has use it. See the example which came on the site.

    3. Re:INSTALL THE DAMN PATCH !!! by ssstraub · · Score: 1

      Yeah, just install the reverse-engineered, hopefully working this time (unlike the last time where our patch actually made things worse), third party patch from this non-trusted source.

      Great idea!

    4. Re:INSTALL THE DAMN PATCH !!! by ssstraub · · Score: 1

      I should have noted that indeed, this *would* be a reasonable thing to trust if the people patching it could actually SEE THE CODE and didn't have to rely on total hack jobs.

  120. Re:About a five month wait for an official Blaster by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You mean the same way the Microsoft forget to patch some of their machines and get infected?

  121. You need a patch? by Sj0 · · Score: 1

    You need a patch? Sorry bud, anyone who cares has probably switched to something that doesn't get exploited every second day.

    --
    It's been a long time.
  122. Best reason to use Opera: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Start Opera.
    Go to www.homestarrunner.com.
    Click on "sbemail" in the bottom navbar.
    Hit "F11" to get GUI-less fullscreen.
    Hit "KP_PLUS" until the Animation fills just about the entire screen.
    Pick your episode and enjoy SBEmails as they are MEANT to be enjoyed!

  123. Microsoft Patches... now used as virus/trojans by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've been receiving (now I filter it) an email from January 1, 1970 (hehehe) from "microsoft.com" with an attachment: "patch.exe" and it only says:

    "Use this patch immeditely!

    There are plenty of viruses now!

    More than 500.000 infected!"

    Poor lusers who pick this up.... :-(

  124. Re:Question for the tin-foil hat wearers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Evidence? It's down in Black & White and called the PATRIOT Act. Read it.

  125. Re:How to shift the tax burden to trucking compani by forgotmypassword · · Score: 1

    Weigh fees

    Bypass fees

    Minimum Corporate Tax

    Weight Mile Tax

    Diesel Fuel Tax

    Believe me, the state governments gets their money from truckers. They just don't all do it the same way.

  126. Microsoft's solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I thought this was great :)

    Things that you can do to help protect yourself from malicious hyperlinks
    The most effective step that you can take to help protect yourself from malicious hyperlinks is not to click them.

    from here

  127. Social Security, Investment, and the Future by cquark · · Score: 1
    Social Security is not an investment scheme. It's a PAYG (pay as you go) pension plan, where your taxes pay for the benefits of current retirees. There's not a dime invested now, nor will there ever be one unless social security is privatized.

    What about the social security surplus you've heard about? It's spent year by year as part of the general fund. The government supports the general fund debt by selling bonds to the social security fund, but issuing bonds to yourself is not an investment scheme. That means that the government will pay for social security from the general fund in the future. It also means that deficit spending of current proportions will be impossible in the future since the social security fund will no longer exist to be a "buyer" of government bonds.

    The social security tax does accomplish some goals which our government views as important:

    • Creates the illusion of an investment.
    • Makes us think we're paying less in income tax, by separating it into two taxes.
    • Reduces income taxes for the rich, as the federal income tax structure peaks at the 43.3% (28% income + 15.3% FICA rate), then goes down to the 28% rate (no FICA) then up a couple of steps to the rate for maximum earners of 35% rate.
    Will there be a social security when you retire? I suspect it will be, but there will need to be a combination of lower benefits and higher taxes to pay for it.
  128. I had about a dozen of these..... by tiger99 · · Score: 1
    ......and blew them all away. I was using Ximian Evolution as my email client and Mozilla as my browser, and can't say that I noticed if the url had been faked or not, but I strongly suspect not!

    It is a bit pointless sending spam which purports to be something to do with a US bank account to a UK email address, and guarantees their immediate deletion.

    Since I stopped using Lookout and Inept Exploder, I have had no problems at all with scams like this, or virii and trojans either.

    The simple answer to IE bugs is to get rid of IE, it is a pathetic browser anyway.

  129. That cuts it! Let's hand over control of the Web by Fantastic+Lad · · Score: 2, Insightful
    to the government!

    (I'm joking, of course.)

    False-Flag actions are easy to perform, they are incredibly effective, and the people in power are usually morally bankrupt (or outright psychotic) enough to feel no guilt in performing them.

    "But they wouldn't DO that! Nobody would attack their own people! They just wouldn't DO that!"

    No? They'd very deliberately lie to get us embroiled in an incredibly destructive and expensive war which is designed primarily to suck billions of dollars out of the public purse and feed it directly into the hands of a very few greedy men. The fact that or youth are being savaged both in body and mind means nothing to such people.

    Oh, I assure you, they would do that. It's not a new idea by any stretch, and why would it be? Easy, effective, and nobody believes it could ever happen. Heck, it's what I'd do in their place. Easy. Effective. --And common! Every time somebody rips off an insurance company through arson or what-not, it's the same thing. It happens. People do it. If you think that people in government do not do it, you are a fool. Period.

    Go and do some research. Look at all the 2003 'terrorist' bombings which took place around the world, notice when each of them happened. You'll notice that at each event, a significant step toward reason was undone. A bomb goes off, and a diplomat attending a key peace talk has a reason to storm out of the room. --Or some variation of that almost every single time. Also notice how the countries attacked were nearly always ones which happen to be sympathetic towards the so-called 'terrorist' nations opposed to US aggression. In other words, ridiculous targets which do not benefit the 'terrorists', but DO benefit the US and Israel.

    My point?

    The web is just another battle ground, folks.

    A significant percentage of this web-damaging activity isn't perpetrated by private hackers or quick-money spammers. It's the covert arm of somebody's government and the aim is to increase the level of fear and uncertainty, to make people more willing to give up freedom. To make the public ready to accept a wave of lunatic arrests of so-called, 'hackers'.

    It'll happen unless people are helped to understand the true nature of these kinds of events. If people don't get angry at the wrong parties, then we might just avoid the culling of the intellectuals which always happens during a fascist take-over.

    Knowledge Protects.


    -FL

  130. How Abot a Patch for STUPIDITY? by danknight · · Score: 1

    Probably one of the first things I would think of upon receving an email like this is that my credit union would send snailmail to inform customers about something this important. the second thing I would probably think is how would people not online get this important information? Also with all the email scams that get circulated, in my company they constantly send Notes informing people to watch for SCAMS (this would seem to cover just about anybody who works in a cube-farm) but STILL people fall for crap like this! It's apparent that critical thinking skills are no longer taught in school and that might be the real problem.

    --
    wanted: one clever sig,apply within
  131. Re:Question for the tin-foil hat wearers by SpacePunk · · Score: 1

    They'll take care of that pesky 2nd Amendment mess as soon as they can.

  132. Re:Question for the tin-foil hat wearers by Max+Threshold · · Score: 1

    I have no doubt that they do. I was once visited by FBI agents bearing copies of an email I sent my father. This was a couple months before they testified before Congress that "Carnivore" only monitors known or suspected criminals. However, I have never been convicted of any crime or been involved with any criminal organization. The fact is, they're watching everyone. And sure, they're probably monitoring everything I do online now. My FBI file is probably three feet thick. That's fine. I'm only one person. My point is that for every "terrorist" they catch, they create two more. If you want to see the United States turn into the West Bank, just keep tightening the noose. People like you will be first against the wall when the revolution comes.

  133. Barnum was Right by Ryosen · · Score: 1

    If you are the type that would check the URL then you would also be the type to realize that the bank, much less the FDIC and its affiliates, more than likely don't have your email address.

    Not to mention the fact that the banks and government institutions always prefer to handle important correspondance via email rather than snail mail. [/sarcasm]

    Then again, no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public. Especially not, it would seem, in Pakistan.

    --

    Ryosen
    One man's "Troll, +1" is another man's "Insightful, +1".
  134. Cost of Mozilla... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The cost of using Mozilla is that you SELL YOUR SOUL TO SATAN! You contribute to the commie plot to steal our souls!

  135. All? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You mean, both of you?

  136. The server is in Korea - 211.191.224.108:3180 by MrBoing · · Score: 1

    I got an original of this email. Perhaps there was more than one version. Perhaps we just don't want to talk about attacks originating in a 'friendly' nation.

  137. Patriot Act & Gitmo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd still like to hear from *ONE* person that the Patriot Act has adversely affected. Everyone that I hear bitch about it, I ask how it has affected them and they cannot answer.

    That's because anyone who has been "adversely affected" probably got shipped down to Gitmo without access to a lawyer or any other human being except their interrogators. You -- and everyone else -- won't be hearing from them for a long, long time.

    Just because CNN and USA Today aren't running big stories about people who have been fucked over by the Patriot Act doesn't mean they don't exist.

  138. "Canadians" and Norte Americanos by TPFH · · Score: 1

    Given today's news stories, both of our nations need to take a long, hard look at how the rest of the world (no pun intended) must look at us.

    Well, not everyone in the USA is so ignorant of the rest of the world. Unfortunately, those people are few and far between. When they travel abroad and are in a dangerous situation, they become temporary Canadians. Some also do it when there is a potential for just being treated rudely.

    I mentioned this to a Canadian friend the other day, and he said that he wished we would stop the practice because now Canadians are starting to be treated like yanks. Seems this tip has been passed down to some of the less clueful US tourists, and now Canadians are being seen as just as bad as the "Ugly Americans."

    Back to the question of Americans, I've been told that people in Mexico and Latin America do indeed think of themselves as Americans, and they refer to the residents of the USA as "Norte Americanos."

    --
    This signature used to contain a cute kitty virus with ansii art. Please set the slashdot editors on fire. Thank you