Child Porn Accusation As Online Extortion Tactic
Glenn writes "There's a story on silicon.com about a new twist in the tactics used by online extortionists trying to blackmail ecommerce sites with denial of service attacks. Yesterday one blackmailer threatened to send out child pornography emails in UK gambling site Blue Square's name if it didn't pay up 7000 Euros." This sounds even worse than simple DoS threats.
Using SMTP as our default e-mail system has got to go...
SMTP is wide open to the kind of attack that is being discussed here. Since there's no authentication of the sender, anybody can send out messages with the "From:" address of the desigated victim, and can smear their reputation into being anything from a spammer to a pornographer.
The only surprise to me is that it took the bad guys this long to make the connection into this being something to make extortion threats over. It's not like this was a well-hidden problem with SMTP, sender spoofing has been done by spammers and phishers for years.
We need to retire this standard and find a better way to move e-mail with the ability to authenticate that the claimed sender is the real sender. It'd solve this problem and a whole bunch of other ones at the same time.
I thought they were supposed to prevent stuff like this... or is it a matter of "once the crime's been comitted, the damage is done permanently" so the law can't possibly compensate enough for the loss? Also, does it being probably international screw up the judicial process?
-Jesse
Nothing says "unprofessional job" like wrinkles in your duct tape.
It should, however, get the attentio of the authorities much more readily though.
These guys admit to having illegal photographic material in their possession and are attempting to use it to make a buck. Catching these would be much better publicity for the enterprising copppers than some two-bit hackers.
You can't take the sky from me...
What, this extortionist thinks that people will honestly believe that a legitimate organization is now sending child porn? I think not. Let him send out all this child porn, thus not only proving that he has it, but also that he's willing to commit extortion and probably a number of other crimes. Good luck to him...
Blackmailers like this provide the test cases that clean up Internet law by building case history. A judge's decision showing the blackmailer is liable protects other victims later, diluting the force of unfounded accusations with trivially contrived evidence.
--
make install -not war
sounds just like an idea i had for a virus about 5 years ago. (no, I didn't write it).
The virus would load a couple of nastypics onto the victims machine, then send out an email to the FBI. The first virus that would get you arrested.
It was just an idea, I have never written a virus that has been let loose into the wild...
People have been forging the From field for a long time, with varying reasons and consequences. In my university, a student sent a message to several thousand people pretending to be the head of the Student Affairs office. It was a very convincing text, but the user's AFS ID (not to mention his IP and room's port) were easily traced with the headers. He was picked up pretty quick.
It might be bad publicity for the company, but it almost certainly will have no legal ramifications for them.
Which brings me to the next question - is there an agency, organization, department, etc. that receives and processes these kinds of threats? If my company got something like this, to whom would I report it? And what would be done?
If there's nobody out there handling these, I suggest a bounty hunter system. The kind with bows and arrows.
The only major effect of this will be the mass blacklisting of emails from online gambling sites.
How will that be a bad thing?
May the Maths Be with you!
And, it scares me miserably that I would even think about that as a tradeoff.
Here's what I do: Bitty Browser & Andromeda
Peopla have told me that me that saying that spammers are one step above pedophiles is in exageration. This type of extortion shows that my statements are true. This shows that spammers are involved with child pornography.
Fight Spammers!
I mean honestly... if you got an email with child porn, and it was from info@partypoker.com, is your first response going to be "Oh my gosh! What an awful company!!" Please... how stupid do you think people are? Well on second thought...
..really, I'm shocked. The company I worked for a few months back on a contract basis was getting threats like "If you don't ____________ we'll spam in your name/send people fales rates for your service/send a virus from your accounts/send magic pixies to rearrange in your sock drawer". This really seems like the natural progression of things, as sad as that sounds. You can really only hope for one of two options. Either inform the media and hope if and when it goes down, enough people are "in the know" that you can avoid any backlash or keep your fingers crossed that one of the proposed email verification ideas takes off.
...of something i was thinking about the other day after a couple weeks of hunting spyware on my PC. what if someone comes along and designs some spyware that actually functions quietly (without the random popup windows and other tell-tale signs of infection). And they are able to open a port and upload any sort of incriminating evidence they would like into your own home... what is there to stop this sort of thing from happening? remember the /. article about north korea waging a cyber war on americans?
ITS ONLY A MATTER OF TIME
~slashdot are my only freinds ):
OT discussion follows: My first reaction was, what a stupid idea -- all it takes is one faked entry on the list to turn it into a great weapon against whoever you hate today. Then I remembered Artists Against 419 and its many clones. Funny how I'm willing to trust one but not the other...
Carousel is a lie!
since they're probably in some flea bit FSU state. and given what many (if not most) in the US call "pornography" (when it comes to children) it wouldn't be hard at all to fill that promise by sending out a few pictures of the local kids playing on the beach.
You seem to have forgotten that the internet doesn't end at the coasts?
This isn't about framing them legally - it's about smearing their reputation further. Any competent website op is going to have logs, and their tiering partners are going to have logs as well. It would be almost trivial to prove to the FBI the "bad stuff" didn't come from them, but it would likely be a fair sight harder getting the luser recipients of said material to believe it.
RTFA. These are online gambling sites. Most gambling has a large amount of organized crime involved. I think that getting fined/arrested should be the least of these scumbags' worries. And whatever the mob would do to them, they would deserve it.
-paul
Pistol caliber is like religion: everyone has their favourite, and theirs is the only right choice.
I disagree. Even though he was eventually cleared (but is still a dumbass), what comes to mind when you think of Pete Townshend? Sort of a different scenario, I know, but mud still sticks.
It's not so much about fear of actual jail/persacution as it is about fear of the shitstorm that arises in the time it inevitably takes for the truth to be found.
The charges were dropped against old Pete, but he still had his name mentioned in the same sentence as 'child porn' countless times in print and on the net.
Sweet informative mod.
Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
Mothers angry at their soon to be Ex-husbands use the "child porn or Molestation" card all the time to try and ensure that the father can not get custody or even visitation. This is usually used as a way for her to "punish" him for what he may have done and is typically found in divorce cases where the husband was fooling around.
People have been using the boogymen like that for decades... Even when proven innocent it will haunt the accused for their life.
It's too easy to accuse without proof and be sure it will cause huge damage.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
Sounds like a fairly standard Joe Job such as has happened with DarkProfits. Only difference being here, they're actually extorting on the threat rather than simply trying to damage someone's reputation. Thing is, this could be very damaging. When it comes to child pornography, people tend to get very irrational and seldom check for any form of proof or second opinion. It's kind of like being accused of being a child molester IRL. Even once you prove your innocence, no one will quite look at you the same again and some people will never truly believe your innocence. Heck, the more squeaky-clean of life you lead, the more guilty you may seem to them. After all, you must have something to hide.
This sig has absolutely no significance and serves only to take up screen space and waste the time of the reader.
Using US Postal Service as our default mail system has got to go...
USPS is wide open to the kind of attack that is being discussed here. Since there's no authentication of the sender, anybody can send out messages with the "From:" address of the desigated victim, and can smear their reputation into being anything from a spammer to a pornographer.
The only surprise to me is that it took the bad guys this long to make the connection into this being something to make extortion threats over. It's not like this was a well-hidden problem with USPS, sender spoofing has been done by spammers and phishers for years.
We need to retire this standard and find a better way to move mail with the ability to authenticate that the claimed sender is the real sender. It'd solve this problem and a whole bunch of other ones at the same time.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
but if a company, and granted i don't gamble so i don't know what their typical mailings are like, that i do business with sends me an e-mail with pornography in it my first thought is not going to be, "sick bastards! i'll never gamble there again!" it's going to be "one more victim, how sad." i think this type of thing get's blown out of preportion, which if i might add is what the spammers are really looking for (next to money). no i'm not proposing that if we ignore it the problem will go away, find the useless scum and string them up, but i think people in general are smart enough to figure out that the companies they do business with aren't involved in the child pornography industry. i see this as a hollow threat because even if it is followed through with it's an annoyance at best (spoken as someone who has an effective spam filter). the worst part about this is the precedent it sets because i can garauntee this is not the last we've heard about this.
The only way to get rid of a temptation is to yield to it.
-Oscar Wilde
No officer I did not send that e-mail, it was spoofed.. I do not have any child porn no sir...
Anyone seeing a problem here? If we start spoofing things like this is becomes much harder ro prove person X did send e-mail Y..
I like muppets.
This is somewhat like posting a "no trespassing" sign, and a chain link fence around your property. It doesn't prevent the people from cutting through the fence and getting hurt on your property, but it lets you show to the courts that you took reasonable steps to prevent it.
This is also a good reason to check SPF records. If your company or ISP lets child porn email go through that the domain owner explicitly said should not be allowed, you may have to show why you aren't contributing to the libelling of the domain owner and why you didn't protect your employees/customers from preventable child porn.
Yeah, at this instant, SPF is not enough of a standard to give you strong protection, but in 5-10 years, I think that will change.
SPF support for most open source mail servers can be found at libspf2.
Like Lyndon Johnson said, it's doesn't have to be true; it's enough to make the poor bastard deny it.
On reading the headline I thought the extortionists were threatening to upload child pornography to their servers then call the authorities.
This would likely get their servers seized at least long enough to figure out that they'd been hacked. To an on-line business, that may just be long enough to put them out of business.
With just emailing in their name, all the extortionists are doing is causing a breif blip of bad publicity before they get the word out that they're being framed.
... when you establish thought crimes.
If times were different the threat might be to send Communist propaganda.
The guy doing the extorting now has to actually have child porn and has to send it himself. The risk if he gets caught is -way- greater then if he were just cooridinating simple DDOS attacks. He'll get all kinds of scrutiny from all kinds of groups that oridinally wouldn't bother. If he's in some totally untouchable country, he's in the unique position that now if the locals find out they'll probably actually care.
I think the extra risk this behavior exposes the perpetrator to will go a long way to self regulate this trend.
1. Don't give them money, if you do you're stupid.
2. Let em do what they claim they're gonna do. It won't hurt your company.
Anyone with a brain will be able to realize, "Hey, maybe it isn't them doing this nasty deed."
Do you REALLY think if Best Buy spams some dog sex images that people would think, "Best Buy is sick! What are they doing?!" Nah.
That's like getting those "Arnold Says 'Don't be a girlie man and vote for Bush'" spams and thinking Arnold actually approved it.
C'mon... people know better. Extortion is outdated.
We have secretly replaced these Slashdot mods' sense of humor with a rusty nail. Let's see if they notice!!
...this is ever going to change. Someone will need to create a new protocol for sending mail that will provide the anti-spam features, but more importantly will provide some new, very desirable feature(s) that people will desperately want. This is the only way to get lazy asses to move to a new protocol. The problem lies in who that someone turns out to be. If Microsoft comes up with some whiz-bang new protocol for sending mail that does what I mentioned above, then all the folks who are Microsoft shops will move in that direction and the openess of the internet will have dissipated that much more. If Sun, or Novell do it (assuming they could manage to get an original idea out of their R&D at all. ;P ) the adoption of this new protocol would be slow. If the IETF come up with something, then we'll get the usual people joining in later in this order: *nix vendors first, ISPs with proprietary setups next, and finally Microsoft after their initial attempts at mimicking the IETF but in a backwards way fail. It happened with HTTP that way...
;P )
So the real question isn't, "how do we stop spam by getting rid of SMTP" but it's, "what can a new protocol do that will up the ante in functionality so that everyone and his brother just HAS to have it"? Personally, I have a completely different solution that I've been using with friends and family using freely available open source tools. Think about your phone numbers (work, home, cell) and you'll get the idea... (Come on folks! I can't feed you everything
-"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
But we have technology that works almost perfectly with existing SMTP servers that combats this very threat.
No, we most certainly don't.
SPF, Sender ID et al are designed to confirm that the sender or sending domain is reflected accurately.
And how, exactly, does this "combat" anything?
Assume a scammer wants to extort money from "UpstandingCo.com". What's to stop them from registering "UpstandingCo.cx", "Upstanding-Co.com", "UpstandingCompany.com", or any one of a zillion other domains, setting up the appropriate SPF/SenderID record, and using that to send out their hoax emails?
Anyone who would believe that "UpstandingCo.com" would send kiddie porn in the first place isn't going to be smart enough to realize that "Upstanding-Co.com" isn't the same outfit.
*THAT* is the problem here. It's not a technical problem, it's a social one - and you can't solve a social problem with a technical solution.
First off, it seems to me that the weak link in this extortion scheme would be the money transfer. The extortionist (not to be confused with "contortionist" or "exorcist", or some combination thereof) would have to be very clever not to be caught by the transfer. If it's something as simple as a wire or drop-off, catching the person or persons responsible would be a snap.
Second, there is no reason to believe that the person(s) making the threat actually has child pornography (not that I'm defending him/her/them). The posession of the material is not required to make the threat. The extortionist could be like a bank robber without a firearm, either claiming to have one but not, or having a toy pistol (having "barely 18" pornography that looks like child pornography).
In short, in order to actually pull something like this off without getting caught, one has to either be very smart or have a very stupid target.
~UP
Eat the Path.
Could we come up with a more motivated group of people, than gamblers? How about people who are often smart, with good memories? How about people with time and money on their hands? How about people, who are social, many of them, to some degree? How about their being *everywhere*?
How about their not wanting to have their "vice" (gambling) even remotely connected to child pornography?
Post a reward to catch the extortionist. Include benefits a high roller would love to get a chance at, say, travel, being able to access certain games or more access to them.
Catching the extortionist, could make everyone involved, at the very least,a very happy gambler and very possibly a local hero with international renown. Worse for the extortionist, I'm sure there are local bookies and mafia sorts which would act, help, simply to keep their reputations from being mired with child pornography in the media.
This doesn't even include all of the various policing agencies which are now going to cooperate to get the extortionist because they have reasonable grounds to suspect child abuse.
If the extortionist keeps it up, they'll be caught & I can't imagine their making any money because really, what company wants to be seen as funding a child abuser?
Aside from the utter fucking nastiness of getting this stuff, it is just as bad to get busted receiving this shit as it is to be busted for sending it, in a frame-up such as this.
I may be completely off here, but I seem to recall a case where a guy was persecuted/prosecuted based on some email he'd gotten via some group but hadn't requested. At least, that's what he claimed.
Even if it were true that he requested it, the problem is with the ambiguity in the law but the complete lack of ambiguity in public opinion. Even if he were eventually found completely innocent and publically touted as a model citizen, there are still going to be all kinds of people who now know way more about his masturbation habits than he'd like, and probably quite a few who refuse to believe that he didn't do it - where there's smoke there's fire.
I can't be certain, but I bet there are some people who have emailed child porn to people and then called the police to turn in the recipient, banking on exactly this kind of thing.
What we need is one of 2 things:
1: A system where we have some reasonable definition of what a person's intent is. Just because Joe Schmo signs up to recieve Hot Anal Action pictures from a Yahoo! group does not mean he is culpable when some asshole spams that group with child porn.
2: A way to absolutely verify where an email came from and then ruthlessly bitchslap the person or people responsible for this kind of shit.
In a reasonable world, I'd hope for 1, but who can say what'll happen.
Since I can't tell them apart, I treat all ACs as the same person.
Now, threatening with sending child porn with their email is not very serious. A lot of spam was sent with my email address (some spammers send spam with real email addresses instead of totally fake ones to try to have more luck, and being hit with that a few times), but checking mail headers normally clean a bit what really happened (why i would travel to mexico just to send spam? :).
Of course, if the mail server of this people is an open relay or is hacked, and is used to send child pornography, spam, 419 scams, Al-Qaeda advertisement or any kind of law-breaking stuff, well, there mail headers will not help a lot, and they will have a bit of responsibility on that.
Of course a smart company will realize that giving in to blackmail will do nothing except encourage more blackmailing, to the detriment of the whole industry. But in order for all companies to take this stance, it should be made an offense to pay off blackmailers, subject to heavy fines. That makes it much easier for a company to reply to scammers "i'm sorry, we'd love to pay you for your lack of services, but uncle sam won't let us." Such a law would be much more effective than a similar one for kidnappings and ransom, as it becomes more of a pure business decision rather than a moral and emotional dillema.