Slashdot Mirror


Spammer Alan Ralsky Indicted

Several users have written to tell us that notorious spammer Alan Ralsky has been indicted along with ten others on 41 counts of spam-related illegal activity. Ralsky has had trouble with the law in the past, and the current litany of charges includes mail and wire fraud, money laundering, conspiracy, and violation of federal spamming laws. From the Detroit Free Press: "The 41-count indictment said Ralsky ... and others used unsolicited e-mail to pump up the price of largely worthless stock in Chinese companies and sold the stock reaping huge profits and leaving Internet subscribers who purchased it holding the bag. The operation also used illegal methods to maximize the amount of spam that could be sent while evading spam-blocking devices and tricked recipients into opening and acting on advertisements, prosecutors said."

19 of 206 comments (clear)

  1. Really so bad? by rudy_wayne · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I hate spammers as much as anyone, but,

    "used unsolicited e-mail to pump up the price of largely worthless stock in Chinese companies and sold the stock reaping huge profits and leaving Internet subscribers who purchased it holding the bag"

    almost seems like a public service. If you are stupid enough to buy stock in a company, especially a foreign company, based on unsolicited e-mail you received, you deserve to get screwed.

    1. Re:Really so bad? by smittyoneeach · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's fairly easy to blame the victim, until it's someone you know.
      Admittedly, the cited scams seem fairly outlandish, but there are some quality hustlers out there.

      --
      Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
    2. Re:Really so bad? by gmack · · Score: 4, Insightful

      How about installing rootkit software to do this? the botnet machines weren't exactly his.

      Also Ralsky has done a lot more than just this. I cringe from the bad memories after he convinced a former employer of mine that spamming animal porn was a great way to make money.

    3. Re:Really so bad? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's hard to feel sorry for someone whose greed overruled all caution, but the person who scams others is still the true villain. Do not excuse fraud.

    4. Re:Really so bad? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Just stupid, greedy, gullible victims.

      When someone starts sucking up entire accounting firms and multiple banks into your scam, maybe, just maybe, fraud is about more than suckering stupid people. See also: Enron.

    5. Re:Really so bad? by jcr · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Maybe they deserve to get screwed, but that doesn't mean that Ralsky deserves their money. A perp is a perp, even if his victim is an idiot.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    6. Re:Really so bad? by jcr · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The amount of spam from half-way legit companies is a rounding error.

      Spamming is theft, and any company involved in it is not legit, by definition.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    7. Re:Really so bad? by jcr · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Theft of services.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    8. Re:Really so bad? by jacquesm · · Score: 2, Insightful

      - theft of time
      - theft of energy
      - theft of other resources

      If it wouldn't be for spam I could probably run my email in the corner of some small machine, because of spam we've had to upgrade our server, just rejecting all those messages (thanks SpamHaus !!) takes up quite a bit of effort.

      For every spam message sent that makes it through all the filtering that effort goes up because at a minimum it takes several seconds to delete the spam.

      Multiply that by several hundreds of millions of spam messages sent every day and you're into significant damage.

      Spam only works because even at a ridiculously low success rate the spammer still comes out ahead because their cost is essentially 0, especially if they use hijacked machines to do the original sending. If the cost to the spammer would be as low as 1/10th of a cent per message I doubt it would be profitable any more, but I don't have any proof to back that up. It would be interesting to see that figure though, what the 'break-even' cost of a spam message would be.

    9. Re:Really so bad? by smittyoneeach · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I had a phishing scam email once that was so convincing I nearly clicked within it, thoughtlessly.
      Then I thought, no, I should log into the service's website directly, and see WTF.
      That was a close call.
      As for you, one hopes that your unbeaten streak is never tarnished. May you also never screw up while trying to pay a bill and get a blemish on your credit report, never get in a fender-bender due to exhaustion, and never have that critical piece of paper with the essential information scribbled on it slip from the wallet, at least while that good friend is around.
      And, should the good friend detect you having an encounter with mortality, may they handle it more graciously than you did theirs.

      --
      Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
    10. Re:Really so bad? by meringuoid · · Score: 2, Insightful
      If you look at what you're saying in a rational way, all he really did was inconvenience you. I'd hate to accidentally step on your foot and physically harm you.

      For 'inconvenience you'. read 'inconvenience hundreds of millions of people several times a day for over a decade'. Ralsky's a career spammer and has been at it for donkey's years.

      If you accidentally stepped on my foot I'd maybe be annoyed. If you deliberately stepped on my foot I'd punch you in the face. If you built a machine capable of stepping on the feet of the entirety of Western civilisation all at once, and you used that machine daily for ten years, you'd better believe I'd want you dead, and I wouldn't be the only one.

      --
      Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
  2. Woohoo! by Serenissima · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Thank God we caught that bastard! Now we don't have to worry about getting Spam anymore! Luckily for us, catching one spammer makes such a difference that we can all rest easy! It's not like there's a veritable army of Spammers waiting to pick up the slack once he's gone! It's a good thing this is headline news, it's really helping us make a difference!

    --
    Give a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day. But light a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.
  3. They don't deserve it... quick lesson in life by RaigetheFury · · Score: 5, Insightful

    http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/www/releases/archives/education/001863.html

    That's the link for my statistics, just so you know I'm not pulling numbers wildly out of my ass.

    Fact is, most people in the US just aren't educated enough to recognize a scam. Look at the earning income and imagine their lives and how desperate one can get. Why do you think those damn AMWAY scams work so well. Promises of a better income for less than well off people.

    Notice how I'm not saying stupid people. Just not educated for whatever reason. Most of the people that read slashdot are VERY tech knowledgeable. We grew up with this. Most of the people who get conned, didn't.

    Whether they were too poor to afford a home computer and internet access, or were ahead of the technical wave... it doesn't matter. Remember, the internet hasn't been around that long in comparison to everything else. In the past 30 years, we've advanced more than we have in 300 years. Some people simply cannot keep up or get confused and don't try.

    It's always easier to be ignorant than try to learn. Look at the statistics in the link I gave you. 27% of the people in the US over the age of 25 have a college degree (This is Bachelors, PHD, Masters, Associates... etc). I bet about 90% of slashdot readers has a college degree of some kind.

    So it's suddenly surprising to you that with all this technology and most of the people not growing up with the technology, we have a lot of VERY uneducated people that are easily scammed?

    I'm not excusing their behavior, and the fact that they fell for something that was too good to be true, means they fell into two categories

    1) Greedy
    2) Desperate

    Otherwise, you typically don't fall for things like that. Just remember that you are in the top echelon of educated people in the US. What's easy for you to understand and grasp isn't for them. But that doesn't make it okay for trash like this to exploit them. In fact it means that they are the worst kind of trash and low life who KNOWINGLY did it again and again and again.

    I have no remorse for any punishment they get. I personally hope they go to prison and meet one of the people whos' lives they ruined financial... who then turned to crime to survive because they didn't know better.

    1. Re:They don't deserve it... quick lesson in life by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Just remember that you are in the top echelon of educated people in the US.

      So were some of the people who bought stock in Enron. Being scammed has little to do with being stupid, and everything to do with the fraudsters' ability to make people believe. Sure, stupid people may believe in things nobody else would, but when fraudsters target the stupid, it's still based on the exact same principle.

  4. I have yet to see... by SamP2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    A conviction where the majority of the sentence came from the spamming law rather than all the other ones (fraud, laundering, etc). The spamming sentence seems to be just the icing on the cake, powerless to have any real effect on its own. It may be adding insult to injury to the criminal, but it's not what nails them in the first place.

    The obvious problem with that is that the current system can only deal with people who commit other crimes while spamming, and while a lot certainly do, there are many spammers that don't break these laws and thus get away with the spam itself. Not to mention that proving something like money laundering is MUCH harder for the prosecution than proving spamming.

    Y'all Slashdotters complain that the the laws which do and shouldn't (or don't and should) get passed/enforced are because of evil greedy corporations pulling the politicians' strings. Well, here's a question for you. EVERYONE hates spammers (other than spammers themselves). End users like you and me who already got offered to enlarge their penises so often that you could make a space elevator out of one, large corporations whose trademarks get infringed on with fake v14gr4 and bring bad reputation, businesses who lose hundreds of manhours digging through spam in their inboxes, ISPs who's bandwidth gets clogged up (and thus the subscribers of those ISPs as well)... Just about everyone, rich or poor, peon or king, hates spam, and large corporations are as eager as end users to get their governments to do something about it. It's a rare case when nobody is trying to sabotage each other, and everyone has the same goal - stamp out spam.

    YET SPAM KEEPS GROWING BIGGER EVERY DAY, AND NOTHING GETS DONE. As I previously described, the current anti-spam laws are a joke when it comes to enforcement, and are only applied to people who get convicted on so many other counts they won't even feel this final punch.

    My question is... WHY?

    1. Re:I have yet to see... by MillionthMonkey · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A conviction where the majority of the sentence came from the spamming law rather than all the other ones (fraud, laundering, etc).

      This is a very common legal outcome. Common law offenses and violations of settled law are much more likely to result in prosecutions and convictions than violations of more recent legislation. Look at the Plame case for example- a law specifically tailored for that situation (the Intelligence Identities Protection Act) had been quite precisely violated, but since one of the elements of the case (Plame's covert status) was officially classified, the actual indictments were for perjury and making false statements to investigators. Old code is generally more reliable than new code.

  5. He'll walk with a slap on the wrist... by Arrogant-Bastard · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ...or so I predict. The maximum fines are but a tiny fraction of his monthly income. The jail terms aren't a threat given overcrowded prisons, the focus on the farcial War on Drugs (TM), the classification of this as a "white-collar" crime, and the technical illiteracy of both juries and judges when it comes to spam. Not to mention that Ralsky is easily smart enough to have planned for this and no doubt has plenty of high-priced legal talent at his disposal -- plus, I wouldn't doubt, a carefully maintained stash of information on other spammers that he can use to plea-bargain his way out of much of this.

    All that remains is a book deal and eventual appearances on cable news networks as "a spam expert". Oh, and he might have to "retire" from spamming in the same way that Spamford "retired" -- by moving on to junk faxing, spyware and typosquatting.

  6. Goodness are you naive. by Quadraginta · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I can only conclude you're a bit on the young side if you believe the cure for being suckered is to become highly educated. Live a few more decades and you'll realize highbrows with PhDs are at least as easy to con as the plain folks who fix your car and take your trash away. Probably easier, actually, since the former's intellectual arrogance will blind them to the possibility that they might be fooled.

    Of course, the scams intellectuals fall for -- dot-com stock, "flipping" hot Bay Area real estate with subprime mortgage money, socialism, etc. -- tend to be more complex and dazzling then the ol' ATM switcheroo or Nigerian bank fraud. And, since well-spoken intellectuals control the narrative, we tend to laugh at the fools taken in by penis pills while we "smart" people smugly shop for micronutrients, dehydrated horse piss and extracts of Chinese weeds at the organic food store to ward off cancer. Ha ha indeed.

    A susceptibility to being conned is part of your character, not a function of your intelligence or education. It's a question of whether you tend to think you know more than you really do, and are willing to make assumptions not backed up by data.

  7. Re:It's about time! by Kilbasar · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You sure give up your principles easily