Slashdot Mirror


US Warns Users of Child-Porn Blackmail Ransomware

coondoggie writes "The nasty Trojan known as Citadel malware, which is based on Zeus, has typically been used to extort money from online banking users, but a new variant is making the rounds that tries to get your money by saying you looked at child porn sites and must pay a violation fee to the U.S. Department of Justice. This variation, called Reveton, lures the victim to a drive-by download website, at which time the ransomware is installed on the user's computer, says the U.S. Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3). Once installed, the computer freezes and a screen is displayed warning the user they have violated United States Federal Law."

139 of 196 comments (clear)

  1. Scummy yet brilliant. by MrQuacker · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Its not like you can call the police and complain about it. You'll instantly get labeled as a pedo and have your kids taken away.

    1. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by Anrego · · Score: 2

      I imagine most people would also be hesitant to take it into a repair shop with that message displayed on the screen even if they recognize it as a scam.

    2. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Seems to me that from your post American law has a much bigger problem than the Russians do in this particular instance.

    3. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by outsider007 · · Score: 1

      Is there something you would like to share with the group, MrQuacker?

      --
      If you mod me down the terrorists will have won
    4. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

      Even if the russians did, the scammers would just relocate their operations somewhere else.

    5. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by AHuxley · · Score: 1

      Yes that repair shop would have a nice ongoing relationship going back many years
      "FBI asks computer shops to help fight cybercrime"
      http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2004/Feb/05/ln/ln01a.html

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    6. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Exactly. Realistically, the only solution is user education. On second thought, that is not much realistic either.

    7. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by Joce640k · · Score: 5, Interesting

      This is why "possession" of something shouldn't be a crime. Anything can be planted in your house/PC/car/whatever without your knowledge.

      A country which allows a computer virus to ruin your life and make you forever unemployable has some serious problems with its laws.

      PS: I cleaned up a machine with this three or four months ago here in Spain.

      --
      No sig today...
    8. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      "PS: I cleaned up a machine with this three or four months ago here in Spain."

      With MyCleanPC no doubt.

    9. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by shiftless · · Score: 1, Insightful

      No, the only solution is to get rid of the police state that scapegoats people and singles them out for extra punishment based on their membership of some arbitrary group of "evil" people.

    10. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by Joce640k · · Score: 2

      But it's possession of illegal material. There are many good reasons why possession of certain stuff can be considered a crime. Toxic/dangerous stuff without a license.

      Sure, if they can prove that you *know* you have the stuff in your possession.

      eg. If they find the heroin in a baggie in your underpants then it's unlikely you didn't know about it. If they find it taped under your desk in a busy office then there's no way you should be in trouble unless they have more evidence. Innocent until proven guilty and all that.

      --
      No sig today...
    11. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And that's the part that scares me more than that ransomware by itself. Because it can only mean one of two things:

      1. That there ARE actually that many people looking at CP and they feel guilty and don't get help for that reason.

      2. The CP witch hunt has crossed the line where people don't even dare to get help if accused wrongly because the allegation alone already puts you on some stupid list.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    12. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by Opportunist · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You mean, like, say, Communists?

      Oh, the ironing.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    13. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      I can see toxic/dangerous substance, because I can cause a lot of people harm with it. With CP, I guess the harm has happened before someone got into possession of the material.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    14. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by DarkOx · · Score: 4, Insightful

      We don't have "American Law" we have whatever your favorite executive agency decides to this week or worse with this person. That is the real problem.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    15. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I am not american, but it seems, that "Innocent until proven guilty and all that." is not always true in US and with every day it becomes event more untrue

    16. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by RodBee · · Score: 1

      It's the same on a lot of other countries. Neocon magazines and newspapers pass the judgment now.

    17. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by VortexCortex · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But it's possession of illegal material. There are many good reasons why possession of certain stuff can be considered a crime. Toxic/dangerous stuff without a license.

      You may disagree that CP should be considered illegal material, but good luck convincing lots of people otherwise.

      On any website there could be this:
      <iframe src="http://pedo.example.com/illegal-porn.jpg" style="width:1px; height:1px; border:none" ></iframe>

      Cross site scripting and/or SQL injection could easily plant that stuff on any website, unseen. Your browser will happily and automatically download the image and put the "illegal material" in your possession.

      We don't need "good luck convincing lots of people" that this can happen to them, all we need are script-kiddies like Anonymous who'd love nothing more than to get a bunch of people wrongfully convicted of child porn possessions esp. if it means making a point about how retarded the law is.

      This stuff isn't dangerous or toxic sitting in your Internet cache unseen and unknown to anyone. It's only dangerous to have the configuration of bits on your drive because the laws have deemed it to be so. Protip: this script kiddie scenario isn't hypothetical... delete your caches regularly.

    18. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by flyneye · · Score: 1

      But wouldn't it be wonderful, instead of all the blunder butt crap the government does do to the U.S. people, why don't they do their secret snooping to find black hats responsible and let the C.I.A. peel all their skin off. I don't think you could get a rights organization to shed a tear, if they've ever fallen prey to a trojan or lost something to a virus.
                  The time for tolerating "black" hats as useful to computer security was sooooo over years ago. Now is the time to make hardcore hunting sport of them.
      I would personally love to own a lampshade made from the ass of the last trojan I cleared off a chumps harddrive.

      --
      *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
    19. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Actually, in my country, the law is that it's not possession if you just look at it with your browser.
      The material might be stored in a cache, but the cache is not considered to be in your possession, since it is temporary, automated and can be deleted by itself at any time.

      This exception is there in the law just to avoid cases like this. If you accidently happen upon a page with illegal material, for example through a malicious link or someone posting something inappropriate on a public forum or chan-board, it is not enough to convict you if a few images happen to be temporarily stored in your browsers cache. You have to actively save or preserve them in some way. In other words, there has to be an intent to keep the material (no matter how you gained access to it).

      It is also like this for watching streamed content, either live cam-streams or video stored on a server you do not own. It is not possession to merely watch a stream. In the case of actively engaging in a live thing, though, there are other laws that may apply, such as recent "grooming" laws.

      Of course, some people want watching live feeds depicting such material to be illegal (notably our Queen once made a statement on it), and are lobbying for it ...

    20. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by flyneye · · Score: 2

      Where's Batman when you need him?
      There really needs to be a vigilante for law enforcement to unofficially ignore while the press reports on the worldwide vivisection of Malicious code authors, botnet admins and their benefactors.

      --
      *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
    21. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I'll vote for option number 2. Any law where lack of criminal intent is specifically excluded as a defense is hideously broken, not only violates the US Constitution (which the neocon Supreme Court lets them get away with) but the principles of common law on which much of our legal system is based. The police state cheerleaders (usually "small government" neocons, BTW) get away with this because..."but, the children!". I can't point to statistics here that I know of because people who try to study the issue in an academic setting often seem to end up in jail and in this witch hunt environment even searching for stats could be dangerous, so I won't and you shouldn't either. However, have you ever heard of a case where somebody who actually had this stuff on purpose would have been let go because nobody could have proved intent? I didn't think so.

      OK, now I just agreed with those who pointed out a serious legal flaw in all of this, without actually commenting on the underlying issue. Trust me, in a public debate doing anything other than constant public cheerleading for the witch hunt crowd will get you branded as a supporter of criminals. The "you're with us or you're with our enemies" simpleminded mentality extends far beyond alleged terrorists in this woefully undereducated country.

    22. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by spiffmastercow · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm not so sure he was joking.. At any rate, if you call the cops they expect to arrest someone. If the real perp is too inconvenient to go after, you're the lucky winner. This is even more likely if the malware does a bunch of google searches for kiddie porn in the background

    23. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This has nothing to do with "possession" or even crime in and of itself.

      This has to do with the hysterical overreaction of the general public towards anything which is so much as suspected as being involved with or related to child pornography. Victims of this ransom-ware may well pay in fear of being ripped to pieces by an angry mob, and their fears would not be all that far fetched at this point. At the very least, they stand a good chance of having their entire life ruined should even a hint of suspicion fall on them.

      Child pornography, like all hysterias, has become an excuse for a segments of the public to indulge in chaos, anarchy and criminal behaviour in their reaction to it. Even a pointed finger can now be a life or death sentence for innocent people. This is why it was important not to let the rule of law slide on this or any other issue.

      But no. People wanted to indulge their outrage. I suppose democracies get what they deserve.

      --
      May the Maths Be with you!
    24. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by Intrepid+imaginaut · · Score: 1

      Yeah you have to admire the unadulterated evil brass balls on these lads. Its a nice mix of social engineering and tech. If they put half as much effort into legitimate business imagine how much money they'd have made.

    25. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by kelemvor4 · · Score: 1

      I'm not so sure he was joking.. At any rate, if you call the cops they expect to arrest someone. If the real perp is too inconvenient to go after, you're the lucky winner. This is even more likely if the malware does a bunch of google searches for kiddie porn in the background

      I agree, it sounds like a very realistic scenario to me.

    26. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by hoggoth · · Score: 1

      By 'rapist', you mean 'is accused of having consensual sex without using a condom', a minor crime in Sweden with a $750 penalty.

      --
      - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
    27. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      Why would you be labeled as a pedo? Are the police somehow going to lend credibility to some random piece of scumware?

    28. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by Jeremi · · Score: 1

      Innocent until proven guilty and all that.

      As far as the police and the courts are concerned, that's (hopefully) the case. As far as your job, marriage, and social life are concerned, it can be more like "innocent until accused, and then forever after assumed guilty, even if you're later acquitted". :^(

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    29. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      PS: I cleaned up a machine with this three or four months ago here in Spain.

      Ah, destroying evidence, eh? Expect extradition papers forthwith..

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    30. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by fustakrakich · · Score: 2

      If they put half as much effort into legitimate business imagine how much money they'd have made.

      Contraband is much more profitable... and tax free. Crime does pay... very well.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    31. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by bitt3n · · Score: 1

      and have your kids taken away.

      at least that's some consolation

    32. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      Is that why the supreme court is giving the executive such a hard time about so many things these days?

    33. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      Thats not a law problem, its a problem of people's perspective. There is no law change you could make which would change the whole "felony makes it harder to get a job" thing, or the whole "accusations stick with you even when proven false".

    34. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Well, communists are outdated. Terrorists don't work anymore either. And, well, the simpletons need someone for their daily two minute hate.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    35. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by toadlife · · Score: 1

      Maybe. The police are generally, average people - i.e. idiots to the average Slashdot reader. Even some of their computer forensics people are at the bottom of the barrel intellectually.

      --
      I don't always use unix-like operating systems; but when I do, I prefer FreeBSD.
    36. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by LordLimecat · · Score: 4, Informative

      You really, really, really dont want to live in a world where vigilante justice is what passes for criminal justice.

    37. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by 1s44c · · Score: 4, Insightful

      By 'rapist', you mean 'is accused of having consensual sex without using a condom', a minor crime in Sweden with a $750 penalty.

      If it's such a minor crime why is Sweden willing to extradite him for it? Maybe because they intend to send him to a US torture camp, something the UK is unwilling to do.

      Rape, having consensual sex without using a condom, or whatever every else Julian Assange is being accused of is just a ruse to get him somewhere the US can deport from.

    38. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Spoken like someone who lives somewhere where there are no mandatory arrest rules, for instance, for domestic disturbance calls.

      See also: There is no situation so fucked up that calling the cops can't make it worse.

    39. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by spiffmastercow · · Score: 2

      Since when do the police know the law?

    40. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by t4ng* · · Score: 5, Informative

      Yes, because something like that could never happen in a democracy, so it must have been a joke!

    41. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by DarkOx · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes once in a great while you see a tiny glimmer of hope but not often enough. The former administration was slightly better in that they at least got Congress to authorize things, even if they boondoggled them to do it. The current admin has lets see:

      1. Orchestrated the passage of the Affordable Care Act in a way that was deliberately designed to prevent congress for reading it before the vote.

      2. Given an American Car company to the Italians over the objection of the bond holders, despite the proper order claims under bankruptcy law. Going on TV and (this is provable) knowingly lying about the position of the bond holders and thereby slandering them as unwilling to help the nation.

      3. Conducted a military action without congressional approval in Libya for more than 60 days.

      4. Decided on their own Due Process, where it comes to the execution of an American Citizen, is met by simply talking about it amongst themselves.

      5. Granted states waivers for the No Child Left Behind act despite the fact that the low does not specify an provision for doing so and they have no legal authority to do fail to enforce the law in this way even if it is stupid.

        I could go on and on but the above are the ones most people will be familiar with. Regardless of if in your view the immediate outcome of some of these actions has been positive or your feelings on the policy being correct. It show contempt for our political system. It damages the rule of law and the strength or our Constitutional protections.

      Over the long term its bad for the nation. No simply voting a GOP at least the mainstream, or TEA party ticket is not the answer. There are good people on both sides of the political isle who act with integrity. That is the answer voters need to set aside their short term agendas and elect people who respect our laws and system. We need to vote for people who look at our political frame work as something to cherish and work within, rather than something to try and weasel around.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    42. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by flimflammer · · Score: 1

      Yes. Because everyone goes irrational after the words child porn comes up. If you ever find child porn on any of your high traffic machines or even something borderline, you better not alert the police, or they'll take your kids away and label you a pedo before any sort of legal proceedings can determine otherwise. And if they can't prove it came from you? Good luck getting your kids back, regardless, because social services will still likely say they aren't safe with you.

      That's the mentality drilled into everyone's head, and it's really not a lie, either. There have been many cases like this. That's why this malware is so brilliant. You start pulling out the child porn card and suddenly they are the loneliest, most helpless victim in the world.

      It's a sick reality, really. Witch hunts have not gone anywhere, they just switched targets.

    43. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by rrohbeck · · Score: 2

      delete your caches regularly.

      Which would also require you to wipe the free space on your disk because LEA scanners look for sectors with specific content.

    44. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I speak from personal experience. Being arrested and charged with a sex crime does fuck you for life in the U.S. I was arrested, spent 14 months awaiting my "speedy trial" and was acquitted in court. However when I purchase a gun my arrest is flagged and it takes three days for the paper work to be approved. Also I have neighbors who now treat me like dirt because the arrest is printed in the paper but the acquittal isn't. Being arrested is akin to being convicted, in the American legal system. Here, there is no such thing as the American Justice system.

    45. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by MrQuacker · · Score: 1

      What are you trying to imply?

    46. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      Also I have neighbors who now treat me like dirt because the arrest

      Do you think the accquital being int he paper would matter? Is there a law which requires thearrest to be in the paper, but prevents the acquittal from being there?

      More to the point, you really think there is a change of law which could change this? If so, tell me what it is, cause im skeptical.

    47. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by Sulphur · · Score: 1

      By 'rapist', you mean 'is accused of having consensual sex without using a condom', a minor crime in Sweden with a $750 penalty.

      That gets you sent to Gitmo.

    48. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by Deliveranc3 · · Score: 1

      I've got to agree with this. People looking at pedophilia look always at the pedophiles as a completely EVIL group. They never examine the actual implications, damage, or related issues. They have laser focus that these people are evil and don't want to know, discuss or think about it anymore.

    49. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by LongearedBat · · Score: 1

      But... vigilante justice is criminal "justice". ;)

    50. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by flyneye · · Score: 1

      Nonsense, I fully expect to purchase a state sponsored hunting license in the near future.

      --
      *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
    51. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by flyneye · · Score: 1

      And yet I really really have for nearly 5 decades.
      I quit buying that saturday morning cartoon crap about cops , judges and lawyers nearly 4 decades ago when it was age appropriate.
      The truth is, you are just as likely to go down for something you didn't do as a criminal is likely to get away. A few patrol, while the majority collect taxes with radar guns to buy new toys. Sure, they bust bad guys if they happen to find them, but the first priority is to acquire more money for raises, toys and ways to invade your privacy.
              Judges, run the gamut from a handful trying to be just to the majority just trying to get through the day. Again, tax collectors for the county/state. More fines less jailtime until it nears ELECTION! Then it reverses. Until the Cops cry to the newsclowns about the jails filling up and the cost of transporting prisoners to other jails for rented space.( Gee , where's all that ticket money? Didn't get your new SWATmobile yet?)
              District attorneys? BWAHAHAHA! These animals would eat a dead rat sandwich to convict you of jaywalking. Their high competition lifestyle is dependent on convictions and nothing else. Jail em all and let God sort em out! No one is innocent. Again, tax collectors.

      Vigilance is beginning to look a lot better now, isn't it?
      Occasionally, some evil bastard dies at the hands of an unknown and everyone hearing about it smiles, if only for a second.
      No costs ( except the donut patrols time for investigationish) No jails and no taxes.
      Some (pedophiles, crimes against women types, and tattle tales) get justice shortly after being jailed. I notice there isn't a stampede to stop that.
      Nope your love of what passes for criminal justice is kind of childish and cute... if you're a little kid.

      --
      *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
    52. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by i+kan+reed · · Score: 1

      This post is generally false, not utterly, but in primary substance. 4 is pretty much true(with the caveat that the previous administration did the same thing without names on the list being approved personally by the president), but the rest require real stretches of reality to be considered true.

    53. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by K10W · · Score: 1

      this ISN'T possession though since it doesn't put illegal stuff on there it just makes users who don't understand computers very well panick and think it may have.

    54. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by Grumbleduke · · Score: 1

      I don't know about Sweden, but under English law (which is what was relevant for the extradition), having sex with someone without their consent is usually rape (depending on the way the sex happens), and the person must have the freedom and capacity to give that consent. In the condom case, the allegation is that the complainant only consented to sex *with* a condom, so sex without one would be non-consensual, thus rape (or similar).

      In one of the other Assange situations, the complainant was allegedly asleep - which has special sub-laws about, presuming a lack of consent unless Assange can suggest otherwise. However, extradition hearings only cover whether or not the alleged offence is sufficient for extradition (and procedural stuff), and are not a proper trial - that is for the Swedes to do.

    55. Re:Scummy yet brilliant. by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      ....That....was the point of my post, that we have such laws.

  2. Stupidity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    A "violation fee" to the "Department of Justice" for a felony without conviction.

    What kind of idiot is going to--- never mind.

    1. Re:Stupidity by Curunir_wolf · · Score: 1

      A "violation fee" to the "Department of Justice" for a felony without conviction.

      What kind of idiot is going to--- never mind.

      I know, right? How ridiculous. It's like people think the President is putting people on some sort of "kill list" and sending drones after them. oh... wait.

      --
      "Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
      --- Jerry Garcia
    2. Re:Stupidity by swalve · · Score: 1

      I know, right? They should do it the right way, and publish decks of playing cards with the targets fancifully depicted as jokers.

    3. Re:Stupidity by Curunir_wolf · · Score: 1

      I know, right? They should do it the right way, and publish decks of playing cards with the targets fancifully depicted as jokers.

      Nah, that would imply a desire to capture and try them. Better to just keep the list secret and just share it with the drone pilots. Cheaper, too - it's not like there's a reward, just kill them. Also makes it easier as we moving from "Americans we think are terrorists" on the list now to "Americans that are political enemies". No need for they drone pilots to know WHY anyone is targeted for death.

      --
      "Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
      --- Jerry Garcia
  3. aka Idiot tax by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Evolution before our very eyes, watch out creationists!

    I think that singling out kiddie porn is kinda stupid though since not too many people watch it. Just illegal porn would be much better. I guess it can be pretty much anything at all with these people browsing the web with internet explorer 6.0 using adobe flash, microsoft silverlight and oracle java and every other plugin you can imagine.

    Hope you catch many idiots!

    1. Re:aka Idiot tax by SuricouRaven · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think it's a great scam, because people are terrified of the idea of being associated with child porn. A threat like that will ensure they don't go to a repair shop, or mention it to anyone. Not the police, not friends or family. Noone. Greatly reducing the chance of the sucker being told it's a scam.

    2. Re:aka Idiot tax by AHuxley · · Score: 2

      If the command server is raided and all the ip's/timestamps that are waiting for CC numbers are found in plaintext?
      Thats a lot of crime to solve, a huge boost for cyber enforcement clear up numbers and a budget boosting PR victory for next year ...

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    3. Re:aka Idiot tax by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      In most places, Illegal porn gets you a a dirty look from the judge and a fine if you are really unlucky. CP on the other hand can get you a 20+ year sentence in the US.

      It doesn't matter if the victim watches it or not. The scammers are hoping to exploit the fact that their victims would be reluctant to seek help out of fear of false prosecution, which is not as far fetched as I'd like to. Personally, I'd suggest zero-write to anyone who caught this bug. I wouldn't count on the malware authors not putting incriminating evidence on infected systems and even putting spiteful logic bombs which trigger when you clean the infection. Better paranoid than trying to reason with the pitchfork jury.

    4. Re:aka Idiot tax by EdIII · · Score: 2

      Just illegal porn would be much better

      Uhhhh... what is illegal porn again? Child porn involves criminal acts with a child. Rape porn, also involves criminal acts against a person. Snuff... well you get the point.

      Other than obvious instances of crimes that are being visually recorded just what do you feel should be made illegal?

      Sounds to me like "illegal" porn is just what you find objectionable on a moral or cultural basis, and is not actually against any law. Unless you are talking about antiquated sodomy laws or something.

    5. Re:aka Idiot tax by Dr_Barnowl · · Score: 4, Informative

      Well, for example, porn that depicts violent acts, even between consensual adults, is illegal in the UK.

      The performers have a defence as long as the acts they participate in are acts which a person is legally able to consent to in the UK, but the photographer and others present (sound crew, director, etc) are on the hook.

      A relatively recent law as well, so not some antiquated sodomy law.

    6. Re:aka Idiot tax by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Just illegal porn would be much better

      Uhhhh... what is illegal porn again? Child porn involves criminal acts with a child. Rape porn, also involves criminal acts against a person. Snuff... well you get the point.

      Other than obvious instances of crimes that are being visually recorded just what do you feel should be made illegal?

      Sounds to me like "illegal" porn is just what you find objectionable on a moral or cultural basis, and is not actually against any law. Unless you are talking about antiquated sodomy laws or something.

      That's kind of exactly what it is, in the US anyway.

      US 'decency' laws are subjective, so porn may be acceptable in the area it was made but legally indecent in another. Max Hardcore is a great example. Went to jail for violating indecency laws in his pornos. Some of his stuff was admittedly nasty, but not explicitly illegal. Obscene is whatever you can talk a jury into agreeing is obscene, so pick your jurisdiction carefully and you never know what might qualify.

      Other good examples include animal sex, if memory serves it's legal in a few states, and not in most. So your Zoo-porn site may or may not be illegal depending on where it's hosted, and then again, it might be illegal to view it where you live even if its legal where it's hosted! Fun with laws!

    7. Re:aka Idiot tax by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Umm... in the other cases you mention, the crime is actually not the sexual act.

      Rape: assault/bodily harm
      snuff: murder

      What else is there? Aside of backwards laws that outlaw stuff between consenting adults, every "sex crime" has an element outside the sexual act that is actually by itself a crime.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    8. Re:aka Idiot tax by misexistentialist · · Score: 1

      What a ridiculous "law", completely unjustified in its existence, inherently unequal in its application, and explicitly discriminatory. A movie with a pig skull-fucking an infant is a more moral work than that piece of legislation.

    9. Re:aka Idiot tax by bergelin · · Score: 4, Informative

      A translator of Manga comics recently got convicted of child pornography in the district court and the court of appeal in Sweden. This picture (nothing nasty really) was judged as child pornography by the district court, but was cleared in appeal. He was still found guilty in appeal though, but for other pictures. The case is currently being heard by the Supreme Court.
      The defendant is not a child abuser by any means, and in all likelihood hasn't got any pedophilic tendencies. He's just a fan of Japanese comics and owns a huge collection of those.

    10. Re:aka Idiot tax by WrongSizeGlass · · Score: 1

      I think it's a great scam, because people are terrified of the idea of being associated with child porn. A threat like that will ensure they don't go to a repair shop, or mention it to anyone. Not the police, not friends or family. Noone. Greatly reducing the chance of the sucker being told it's a scam.

      If the authors of this scam thought it through they probably delete all your temp internet files and your history. That way it looks like you already tried to clean up your activity (the act of an obviously guilty person). They may even send a few http requests to known CP sites to plant some evidence on your computer.

    11. Re:aka Idiot tax by Zaphod-AVA · · Score: 1

      Huh. How does it not apply to boxing, wrestling, and MMA?

    12. Re:aka Idiot tax by ehlo · · Score: 1

      Well, kind of. The actors wouldn't be off the hook if they did something that the photographers and other present would be liable for since you cannot consent to sex akin to BDSM (you cannot consent to bodily harm that isn't desirable ie contact sports/surgery): R v Brown (the Spanner Case): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_Brown (this was a 1993 case in which homosexual men consentually engaged in BDSM were all sentenced).

      In law school the above case is taught alongside (well it was at mine anyway) a 1996 case (after R v Brown), R v Wilson, in which a man used an iron poke to brand his wifes ass. The act was considered to be akin to tattoo and consent was a defence. The man was not held liable because it could not be established that this was 'undesirable' activity, and contrasted to R v Brown where in fact none of the men were 'hurt' per se. In R v Slingsby (1995) a man who fisted his wife whilst wearing a ring tore her vagina and she developed a blood infection and eventually died. Because this sexual act gave 'pleasure' and was consentual this was held to be a defence. (???)

      There is a terrible discrepency in how the law is applied to heterosexual couples and how it is applied to homosexuals engaged in seemingly LESS culpable acts. There were demonstrations at Russell Square in London in the 90s when these cases were coming about.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Spanner
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consent_(criminal_law)
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_Brown

    13. Re:aka Idiot tax by ehlo · · Score: 1

      There are areas of the law where there is presumed consent. They are 'desirable' activities so to speak. These include sports (particularly contact sports), the fact that you may get jostled on the underground in the morning on your way to work, etc.

    14. Re:aka Idiot tax by Jeremi · · Score: 1

      Uhhhh... what is illegal porn again?

      Well, in Saudi Arabia it would be pretty much all of it.

      Other than obvious instances of crimes that are being visually recorded just what do you feel should be made illegal?

      This isn't an issue of what the previous poster thinks should be illegal, it's an issue of what the law says is illegal. If you live in a country where porn is illegal, then you have to deal with that reality, regardless of how you (or anyone) think things ought to be.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    15. Re:aka Idiot tax by am+2k · · Score: 1

      Personally, I'd suggest zero-write to anyone who caught this bug. I wouldn't count on the malware authors not putting incriminating evidence on infected systems and even putting spiteful logic bombs which trigger when you clean the infection.

      Technically, that stands true for every kind of unwanted software (any worm, virus, etc). As soon as you run untrusted code without any restrictions, your whole system is not to be trusted any more.

      That's why I consider virus removal software to be a flawed concept in itself.

    16. Re:aka Idiot tax by Dr_Barnowl · · Score: 1

      And his (insightful) point was that a porn film involving these acts can have *explicit* consent, have greatly reduced risks of injury (I think the average S&M flick probably has a script and performers who will accept "safe words", unlike the majority of contact sports, but probably something it has in common with WWF), but remains illegal under this law, despite being less dangerous, just because people are getting their rocks off instead of screaming until their face goes purple while drinking beer and waving a big foam finger.

      I'll bet I know which one leads to more uncontrolled punch-ups and permanent injuries (to unconsenting participants).

    17. Re:aka Idiot tax by rrohbeck · · Score: 1

      Aha! Japanese comics. He's obviously a pervert. Lock him up!

    18. Re:aka Idiot tax by pantaril · · Score: 1

      Uhhhh... what is illegal porn again? Child porn involves criminal acts with a child

      Unfortunately you are wrong. In most western countries, child porn involves material depicting persons who look like minors engaging in "indecent" actions.
      No real child needs to be involved. Erotic comix can be considered child porn. Yes, the law is stupid.

  4. Who would fall for a fee? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    I'm pretty sure with all the "DINK OF TEH CHILLUNS!" bullshit that goes on that we burn anyone that looks at child porn at the stake, no one will believe they can get away with it for just a fine.

    1. Re:Who would fall for a fee? by Billly+Gates · · Score: 2

      The problem is the laws define a pedo with just having the material.

      For example, if I uploaded kiddie porn to your computer you are a criminal for having it. Sure the penalty is much less than being a kiddie porn manufacturer which is someone who sends it but you are not guilty.

      Worse, try to get a job again? Your future is ruined forever, because of an asshat and many will pay to make the problem go away! This is truly evil in the nth degree whether you feel this current laws are silly are not.

      No respectable employer will hire anyone and yes if someone plants porn your life is gone whether you had anything to do with it or not. I can see people willing to pay believe or not sadly for these reasons.

    2. Re:Who would fall for a fee? by MacGyver2210 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      There was recently (in the last few months, I believe) an article about intent in child porn cases. I think it was even on /. It said that simply possessing the child porn wasn't enough, there had to be proof that the person had intentionally viewed it.

      found it. http://tech.slashdot.org/story/12/05/10/138205/ny-ruling-distinguishes-downloading-viewing-child-pornography

      Is that only in New York, or has it set some sort of precedent or how does that work? I'm not fluent in legalese.

      --
      If the only way you can accept an assertion is by faith, then you are conceding that it can't be taken on its own merits
    3. Re:Who would fall for a fee? by Amouth · · Score: 5, Insightful

      but even if it is only in that area - you have to prove you didn't do it, and even if you can do that you have to do it n court, even if you come away "free" then it is still there that you where once prosecuted for it, and you have to live/survive that process which will more than likely ruin your life as you know it.

      --
      '...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
    4. Re:Who would fall for a fee? by rally2xs · · Score: 2

      Pay? Not much more than the price of a brand new hard drive,which last time I looked was about $90. Bury the old dribe somewhere unretrievable, install the new drive, and you either baccked up your data or you didn't. No worse than a hardware meltdown...

    5. Re:Who would fall for a fee? by SuricouRaven · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not for very long, though. If you follow the media, espicially the more conservative media, there is a fair bit of public outrage at the ruling - lots of headlines along the lines of 'New York legalises child pornography!'. So much that within less than a day of the ruling, the legislature was already in the process of passing a bill to reverse it. It will, without a shadow of a doubt, sail through unchallenged.
      http://www.deseretnews.com/article/765576135/New-York-bill-quickly-follows-court-ruling-on-child-porn.html

    6. Re:Who would fall for a fee? by jimicus · · Score: 1

      Not much more than the price of a brand new hard drive,which last time I looked was about $90. Bury the old dribe somewhere unretrievable, install the new drive, and you either baccked up your data or you didn't. No worse than a hardware meltdown...

      Considering how damn awkward some malware is to remove, this is probably not a bad solution for a lot of infestations. It's certainly quicker than a scan with a live CD followed by booting in safe mode, running every virus scanner you can think of, digging through HijackThis logs and still finding there's traces on there - and for a lot of people, time is money.

    7. Re:Who would fall for a fee? by F.Ultra · · Score: 1

      Yes, but we are talking about people that are not computer savvy. To them the whole computer is the hard drive. And since they also think that computers are magic, they probably believe that the message will reappaer on the new hard drive the instant it's installed.

    8. Re:Who would fall for a fee? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      From the link:

      "The viewing of child pornography creates a demand and there is an entire industry out there of these images," she said. "When there is a demand, that requires abuse of the children to make more images."

      So if you download music for free you're killing the music industry, but if you download child porn for free you're supporting the child porn industry?

    9. Re:Who would fall for a fee? by gstrickler · · Score: 2

      Obviously you must be a pedophile, anti-American, neo-Nazi, terrorist [did I miss any?]. How dare you mock "think of the children".

      Everyone, for the sake of our children, please help root out this vile anonymous coward. We must not allow questioning of anything done for the children. /sarcasm

      --
      make imaginary.friends COUNT=100 VISIBLE=false
    10. Re:Who would fall for a fee? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Wonder what would happen if someone changed the trojan to actually display real child porn a few days prior.
      And write it all over the victims hard drive.
      Both of which would be crimes (for the VICTIM) because of stupid laws like this.
      And instead of demanding money it would send an email to the police.

      Great way for the imprisoning industry to get more "customers".
      Or to deal with the idiots that make INVOLUNTARY viewing and possession of child porn a crime.

    11. Re:Who would fall for a fee? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      My hope is just that this trojan infects the same bunch of people that kept cheering on when some BS laws got proposed and passed.

      I cannot wait for the first politician infected with it. Please let me be the one who gets to analyze the computer, please... it will be the first NDA I violate.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    12. Re:Who would fall for a fee? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Money? C'mon, be a bit more creative.

      Hint: You cannot post critical political comments from a PMITA jail.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    13. Re:Who would fall for a fee? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      lol, tell that to the crowd with the pitchforks. Or you next (not-)employer.

    14. Re:Who would fall for a fee? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      She's lying. There's little to no commercial trading. A few places require newcomers to trade pictures to join but most sources are free. Commercial trade is too dangerous.

      The curious thing about child porn is that so few people are involved in it that very few actually know how it works. That leaves the field open to people with an agenda to lie because you cant argue against them without knowing how the field works and if you know then people will think you're involved in it.

    15. Re:Who would fall for a fee? by robthebloke · · Score: 1

      Tell that to the pediatricians.

    16. Re:Who would fall for a fee? by Nimey · · Score: 2

      Now if only this trojan could be targeted at certain prominent conservatives... say Limbaugh, Murdoch, et al. When it came out they'd gotten this on their computers, bet you the conservative media drumbeat changes.

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    17. Re:Who would fall for a fee? by TinyLittleMend · · Score: 2

      Unfortunately for those who are truly innocent

      No. Not "unfortunately." I'd rather have a hundred criminals escape than wrongfully convict a single innocent person. People are innocent until proven guilty, not the other way around. That doesn't change just because children are involved, or for any other reason.

      Pedophiles were once children, so, are there any signs that would indicate someone may grow up to become a pedophile?

      It's only a problem if they become child molesters. Pedophiles don't necessarily molest children, and I do not believe in thought crime.

      The cycle needs to be ended if we want to prevent the victimization of children.

      If the solution involves punishing people for thought crime or harming innocents, I'm out.

    18. Re:Who would fall for a fee? by rrohbeck · · Score: 1

      It shouldn't be too hard to scan through the files on their machine and do some simple word statistics on things that they wrote. I have a feeling that you can find the political persuasion of the author with good accuracy.

    19. Re:Who would fall for a fee? by rrohbeck · · Score: 1

      "I think of children all the time," said the pedophile.
      Corollary: Anybody who thinks of children might be a pedophile.

    20. Re:Who would fall for a fee? by luther349 · · Score: 1

      true but most jobs never check shit. it cost them to much money to run credit and background checks on every new hire..

  5. Not as bad as I expected... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I actually expected this to really plant CP on the victim's computer and offer to remove it for a fee. Now THAT would be an asshole move.

    1. Re:Not as bad as I expected... by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That would also make them distributors and the target of just about every federal and most international police forces. As it stands now, it's just extorsion so as far as the governments are concerned, they're just lumped in with all the other un-prosecuted Nigerian scammers.

    2. Re:Not as bad as I expected... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Oh come on, as long as the CP is not under copyright, no one will come after them over a border.

  6. de-lousing... by harvey+the+nerd · · Score: 2

    Sounds like a job for a bootable Linux lite thumb drive with trojan hunting files.

    1. Re:de-lousing... by SuricouRaven · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You are not the target of this scam.

    2. Re:de-lousing... by AHuxley · · Score: 4, Funny

      Pay money or your IM/irc friends gets random Windows 8 questions .... interlaced with Maths 101 questions...
      It took you a long time to find Linux users, pity if they where to think of you as dual booting...

      --
      Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    3. Re:de-lousing... by Hentes · · Score: 1

      You mean like this?

    4. Re:de-lousing... by luther349 · · Score: 1

      sounds like a job for dban.

  7. I don't get it by Chrisq · · Score: 4, Funny

    Bury the old dribe somewhere unretrievable

    I guess "old dribe" must be the guy sending out these blackmail notices then.

  8. Drive-by Downloads? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    lures the victim to a drive-by download website

    What? Why is this still even a thing? What browser setup are people using that this is still a viable attack vector?

    1. Re:Drive-by Downloads? by Zaphod-AVA · · Score: 1

      All of them using Flash and Java. Most of which spend a lot of time unpatched. Even if they are, zero day exploits happen monthly.

  9. It's worldwide by jimicus · · Score: 4, Informative

    I've seen a version that's been localised to the UK; apparently there are also versions localised to Canada. I haven't analysed it but it wouldn't surprise me if it's all the same trojan and it uses geolocation to display an appropriate logo.

    Brilliant scam because even if the user knows it's a load of rubbish, nobody wants to be even remotely associated with paedophilia. You'd have to be a bit of an idiot to think you could make such an accusation go away by paying a small fine - or for that matter to believe that the police's MO in these cases is to put a great big warning on your screen (rather than to arrest you at dawn and take all your computers away), but I suspect there are probably enough idiots in this world to make it profitable.

    1. Re:It's worldwide by deroby · · Score: 5, Informative

      My dad's PC had this, although apparently the creators didn't do their homework very well. Belgium having 2 (main) languages the scareware used the wrong language for this part of the country so he hardly understood what needed doing (not everybody speaks both languages). Off course the police logo etc made it look kind of daunting and -although it started up ridiculously slow- once it took over the pc became completely unusable.

      It was rather easy to get rid of (safe mode, regedit, hijack-this and then a full scan with Security Essentials -which seemingly had missed it originally!)

      The part I don't get is : how do the scammers get to their money (assuming some people are silly enough to pay) without the possibility of being traced back ?
      => shouldn't there be ridiculously easy traces to follow via paysafecard.com ??
      => worst case it should be easy enough to have these -at least!- blocked

      --
      If there is one thing to be learned on slashdot, it has to be sarcasm.
    2. Re:It's worldwide by zyzko · · Score: 1

      Yes, and in Finnish among other languages, F-Secure has identified a lot of localized versions. Although that malware is not that well sophisticated as zeus (instructions to get away from it are quite simple and included in the blog article) the method is the same - display the logo of a local law enforcement agency (police, internal police...) and demand (an anonymous) payment because they have found cp on your machine.

      Easy money because it is a big accusation (even stronger than copyright infringement - with cp you are totally destroyed instantly by the community, copyright infringement at least gets yous some good-will) and just paying a relatively small sum may seem like an easy way out of the trouble. Of course education will help but there are those who are so freaked out by the accusation that they will not even think of seeking help and those who feel guilty because they have surfed "free porn" and are not really sure if that is all ok (no intentional cp, but you can never be sure with those shady things, can you, maybe those girls were 17 and not 18 after all...) and are afraid of if anyone else finds that out.

    3. Re:It's worldwide by Dunbal · · Score: 3, Informative

      how do the scammers get to their money (assuming some people are silly enough to pay) without the possibility of being traced back ?

      Usually they use different 3rd parties, don't tell them where the money is comig from or where it's going, and have them take the fall if they get caught.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    4. Re:It's worldwide by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Usually they use different 3rd parties, don't tell them where the money is comig from or where it's going, and have them take the fall if they get caught.

      You know those "work at home" advertisements? Most of them are just envelope-stuffing, blog-spamming scams. But some of them actually pay out quite well, and those that do often involve performing sketchy money transfers. Taking the fall is what they pay you for.

    5. Re:It's worldwide by Deliveranc3 · · Score: 1

      What if that warning came saying "We can't get a warrant yet, but you're on file and we'll check up on you from time to time when it's legal." Might make people stop before they end up in prison for doing something really illegal.

      Cops give out warnings all the time, it would be nice to think they check the person's record first though.

  10. Love this virus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Brilliant scam, lol

  11. general purpose virus by tommeke100 · · Score: 1

    it's not really targeted at child pornography. I've moved the German version from a couple of PC's (BundesPolizei it said) a couple of months ago, and it said something 'pornographic material has been found on your computer etc...'. So child pornography was just part of the options. Anyway, it's exactly the same type of scam as those fake anti-virus trojans that try you to lure into buying their 'software'. It's not really looking for pornography on your computer, it's just giving that message to everyone and trying to scare them into paying.

  12. Someone do the right thing... by 3seas · · Score: 1

    make one of these that informs people to instruct government on what and where the taxes they pay are to be spent.

    1. Re:Someone do the right thing... by Jeremi · · Score: 1

      make one of these that informs people to instruct government on what and where the taxes they pay are to be spent.

      How would that be different from the status quo?

      Everyone already "instructs their government" that taxes spent on things that primarily benefit them (or their community) is "vital and necessary investment", and anything that primarily benefits other people is "wasteful government spending".

      I doubt malware is going to give anyone a broader perspective.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
  13. Breaking News: by VortexCortex · · Score: 1

    US Warning of Child-Porn Blackmail Ransomware Remains Unheeded

    US Gov. to proceed with CISPA anyway.

  14. As night follows day by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Who couldn't see this coming? First, you make "looking at child porn" the worstest crime imaginable, like genocide against against a million nuns, worst than murder, worst than cannibalism, worst than, I don't know, eating fatty food, and then you...PROFIT!

    Anybody want to bet that in the next few years (or less) we'll be hearing about some major politician who has (cue the somber, scary music...) looked at drawings of naked children.

    "Is he right for America? We don't think so. Paid for by Americans for Families and Stopping Immoral Behavior among People Who are Different From Us."

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
    1. Re:As night follows day by rrohbeck · · Score: 1

      What we need next is a version than downloads some Al Qaeda manuals to your drive. Pay a ransom or you'll be locked away without trial.

  15. let's say the Kelly Middle School gets hit by this by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    let's say the Kelly Middle School gets hit by this what will happen then??

  16. Linux for another win! by Murdoch5 · · Score: 1

    Sucks to be anyone running Windows, I guess now all Windows users are pedo's, good job Gates!

    1. Re:Linux for another win! by techno-vampire · · Score: 1

      There seems to be an unspoken command that news agencies never use the term "Windows Virus", "Windows Trojan", "Windows Malware", etc.

      That's because to the people writing those stories, using a PC equates running Windows. Yes, some of them have heard of Linux, but they usually don't know what it is and even if they do, they're going to assume that their audience doesn't.

      --
      Good, inexpensive web hosting
  17. Violating Federal Copyrights and Identities by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 3

    The operators of this extortion system should be on the "Public Enemy #1" list. Not only are they an organized syndicate extorting from Americans, on a very large and nationwide scale. They are impersonating Federal officers to do it. Protecting the ability of Americans to respect someone who claims to be a cop, especially a Federal one, is among the highest priorities of the Justice Department. Or at least it should be.

    The failure of the FBI and the other cop agencies we give $BILLIONS to every year, who have vast and even un-Constitutional powers to do whatever they want in the name of protecting us, to do what's necessary to stop these giant phishing operations is baffling mystery. Why banks are allowed to let their trademarked brands get diluted by phishers robbing in their name, resulting in large and widespread losses contrary to the very essence of trademark and copyright, is a mystery. But the failure of the cops to protect themselves is even more bizarre.

    --

    --
    make install -not war

    1. Re:Violating Federal Copyrights and Identities by Deliveranc3 · · Score: 1

      Police budgets were cut under Bush and are only getting up to those levels now. Meanwhile, the TSA, CIA,NSA, HOMELAND SECURITY, Etc. have INSANE budgets. They're investigating and preventing crimes, why not just hire more police? Or more detectives (FBI). As far as I can tell it's because those agencies have less judicial oversight so they can be used to target subversives or whoever is inconvenient, often with them not even realizing that's what they are being used for.

  18. Obligatory bitcoin reference by Jawnn · · Score: 1

    Can I pay the ransom in bitcoin?

  19. reasonable doubt by Organic+Brain+Damage · · Score: 1

    This trojan just provided everyone ever accused of possessing kiddie porn with reasonable doubt.

  20. MOD PARENT UP by BenEnglishAtHome · · Score: 1

    Insight and accurate information should be rewarded.

  21. But...... by oldmeddler · · Score: 1

    ...will it run on Linux?

    1. Re:But...... by knorthern+knight · · Score: 1

      > ...will it run on Linux?

      If it's a Java or Flash exploit, yes it can. I haven't had Java on my linux machine for years. And while I generally disagree with a lot of Steve Jobs' ideas, getting rid of Flash was a brilliant idea. A container file for audio/video does *NOT* need an embedded scriptable language http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actionscript as part of the spec. The scripts that execute as part of the Flash spec are the root of the vulnerability, OS notwithstanding.

      Not only that, the newer HTML5 video codecs are more efficient. My 6 megabit ADSL connection nets 4.98 megabits down. It can almost keep up with 1080p Flash videos. E.g. if I let a video buffer for 30 seconds, it can play 5 minutes before the playback overtakes the downloading video. But HTML5 1080p WebM videos can easily be played without buffering at all.

      --

      I'm not repeating myself
      I'm an X window user; I'm an ex-Windows user
  22. what we need to stop this by RobertLTux · · Score: 2

    1 make it a lot easier for folks to get hands on Self Booting Fix discs (hint Norton/Mcafee/ect should include this in their products)

    2 redefine CP laws so that CP is defined in a strict narrow way:
    as a rough example:
    A Does it depict a Sex Act with a Minor?? (wiggle for models with actual ages not in line with appearance needs to be written in)
    or
    B Is the Model NUDE (or only clothed in something Trival) AND is it devoid of Artistic Diagnostic or Documentary Value
    or
    C Does it depict any other crime

    Then the Pic/Vid/media IS NOT CHILD PORN.

    the problem is BURN THE WITCH!! is never Justice so we need sanity in the laws.

    --
    Any person using FTFY or editing my postings agrees to a US$50.00 charge
  23. OT: Don't laugh, violation fee=Civil prosecution by davidwr · · Score: 1

    A "violation fee" to the "Department of Justice" for a felony without conviction.

    What kind of idiot is going to--- never mind.

    You won't see it for child porn investigations, but for fraud and other white-collar crimes you frequently see the feds doing a "civil prosecution" instead of or in addition to a criminal one.

    Many civil prosecutions wind up with something akin to a plea bargain: The feds offer to close the case in exchange for paying a "violation fee," er, I mean a fine, and perhaps agree to oversight or other "consent decree" conditions, without admitting any wrongdoing.

    The burden of proof for the government in a civil prosecution is a lot lower and when it is met, those responsible for wrongdoing are subject to significant forfeitures and/or civil fines, the objective of deterring other greedy people is met, and nobody goes to jail or winds up with a criminal conviction.

    Unfortunately, civil prosecution is also harder for an innocent person to fight.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  24. Memo to scammers - next time be grey-hat by davidwr · · Score: 1

    Next time, be grey-hat:

    Next time circulate "You have downloaded child p0rn" ransom-ware only among people who have actually intentionally done so.

    Even better, target police pretending to be child-porn-traders. This should be easy as they no doubt widely outnumber real child-porn-traders.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  25. Clear Cache on Exit. by krischik · · Score: 1

    One more reason to have the “Clear Cache in Exit“ activated.

    But you are right: Most do not know about that.

    Interesting: In Germany the content of the browser cache is not considered “possessing“.