Slashdot Mirror
Porn Virus Blackmails Victims Over "Copyright Violation"
FishRep writes with this excerpt from the BBC: "A new type of malware infects PCs using file-share sites and publishes the user's net history on a public website before demanding a fee for its removal.
The Japanese trojan virus installs itself on computers using a popular file-share service called Winni, used by up to 200m people.
It targets those downloading illegal copies of games in the Hentai genre, an explicit form of anime.
Website Yomiuri claims that 5,500 people have so far admitted to being infected.
The virus, known as Kenzero, is being monitored by web security firm Trend Micro in Japan.
Masquerading as a game installation screen, it requests the PC owner's personal details.
It then takes screengrabs of the user's web history and publishes it online in their name, before sending an e-mail or pop-up screen demanding a credit card payment of 1,500 yen (£10) to 'settle your violation of copyright law' and remove the webpage."
So you call the cops, transfer the money, find out who is on the other end, have the law and credit card agencies come down hard on them.
Unless you're afraid of getting caught with porn...
The MAFIAA must be wondering why they haven't done this yet. "Why waste time in the courts guys? Why lobby politicians?"
'Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun.' - Mao Tse-tung
The editors figured out an easier way to get those all important dupes up?
I'll never make that mistake again, reading the experts' opinions. - Feynman
Serves them right for using an ancient system (two generations behind, PD (Perfect Dark) via Share). This is like someone still using, say, Kazaa, and being surprised there are fake files.
I think it's worth pointing that Winni is used almost exclusively by the Japanese, and the total population of Japan is still under 130 million people. The 200 million users figure put forth by the BBC is a bad guess at best, and completely made up at worst. I honestly expected better from the BBS, but why should factual reporting get in the way of writing a sensational story?
Ethics.
Why would an individual care if his or her browsing history is published online? Employers search for Facebook or MySpace pages because these websites contain 'proof' that you behaved in some way or other (e.g. pictures), but a browsing history does not tell them anything other than, 'a computer in my household has accessed these websites at some point in time or other,' which can easily be accounted for by explaining that a friend pranked your machine with tentacle porn or your children were just really excited about Misty and Ash Ketchum.
But perhaps the real emphasis is on the following, from TFA:
A fictitious organization calling itself the ICPP copyright foundation issues threatening pop-ups and letters after a virus searches the computer hard drive for illegal content - regardless of whether it actually finds anything. It offers a "pretrial settlement" fine of $400 (£258) payable by credit card, and warns of costly court cases and even jail sentences if the victim ignores the notice.
If an individual knows that they have illegal content on their HDD they might opt for this $400.00 settlement, as past copyright infringement suits have cost individuals hefty sums.
No yesterday, no tomorrow, and no today.
Sounds like iTunes....
iTunes says "you're about to download a song from one of the artists we profit from and for $10 we'll remember everything about you"
For this to be effective, either the website needs to be highly publicized, or the user needs to be stupid or in a panic. I can't image the web site can be publicly known for long; virus maintainers have a hard enough time keeping their private servers up and connectable. I wonder how the virus convinces the user that their private history will be available for peruse by their friends/coworkers/family?
Symantec has some information on the virus: HTTP Infostealer Kenzero Activity: Attack Signature - Symantec Corp.