Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Facebook Dislike Hype Exploited In Phishing Campaign

Posted by samzenpus on from the click-here-and-win-a-prize dept.

An anonymous reader writes: A new Facebook scam is quickly spreading across the social network which plays on the announcement of the highly-anticipated 'Dislike' button. A new scamming campaign is now exploiting impatient Facebook users anxiously awaiting the dislike button addition, by tricking them into believing that they can click on a link to gain early access to the feature. Once the unsuspecting victim selects a link, they are led to a malicious website, which enables access to their private Facebook accounts and allows the hackers to share further scam links on their behalf.

54 comments

  1. Moderation system by MrKaos · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Do any other sites have the same sort of moderation system that /. has?

    Moderated 'dislike' or 'like' seems kind of lame in comparison.

    --
    My ism, it's full of beliefs.
    1. Re: Moderation system by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the shills and their minions work overtime at /.

    2. Re:Moderation system by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      It's an interesting comparison. While the slashdot system obviously allows us a more fine-grained expression of opinion, it's widely abused, e.g. people modding down posts as redundant or overrated because they disagree with the content of the post. And the maximum +5 score means you can't tell if just a handfull of people found a post interesting, or thousands of people. You also can't really tell how controversial a post is from the score on slashdot, you just get a majority result, whereas e.g. on theregister.co.uk, if your post gets a lot of upvotes and downvotes, you can see that it was controversial, not just that you got a few more of one than the other. While the like/dislike or upvote/downvote system is much simpler, there is some power in that simplicity; you get a very simple measure of approval/disapproval, and it lets the content of a post speak for itself as to why it was approved/disapproved of. I actually kind of prefer that system.

      BTW I'm assuming that facebook intends to separately show how many likes and dislikes a post gets, rather than just having dislikes cancel out likes, which would be lame. But I'm not interested enough to actually go and confirm that, as I don't used fb.

    3. Re:Moderation system by rmdingler · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's an interesting comparison. While the slashdot system obviously allows us a more fine-grained expression of opinion, it's widely abused, e.g. people modding down posts as redundant or overrated because they disagree with the content of the post. And the maximum +5 score means you can't tell if just a handfull of people found a post interesting, or thousands of people. You also can't really tell how controversial a post is from the score on slashdot...

      Right, you'd still have to actually read the post to form an opinion. Life is crazy hard.

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

    4. Re:Moderation system by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whether a post is controversial or not is not a matter of one person's opinion of the post, so no, you cannot judge how controversial a post is by reading it. Controversial means that it splits opinion, that lots of people agree, and lots of others disagree. So to determine how controversial a post is, you need the opinions of those others. You can judge how likely in your opinion a post is likely to be by reading it, but that's not the same thing.

    5. Re:Moderation system by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the post is controversial then it will have replies with the points people disagree on. Why does it matter anyway?

    6. Re: Moderation system by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the shills and their minions work overtime at /.

      *groan* - so cynical...

    7. Re:Moderation system by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only a tiny percentage of people bother to comment versus the number that manage to click an upvote or downvote button. Why does it matter? Why the moderation matter at all? Because we're interested in what people think about a subject. If a large number of people feel the desire to vote on a post, even if they're evenly split between upvotes and downvotes, that tells you something about the contents of that post.

    8. Re:Moderation system by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 2

      It's an interesting comparison. While the slashdot system obviously allows us a more fine-grained expression of opinion, it's widely abused, e.g. people modding down posts as redundant or overrated because they disagree with the content of the post. And the maximum +5 score means you can't tell if just a handfull of people found a post interesting, or thousands of people.

      ^^^ THIS, times about a billion.

      Was it a few people that disagreed with you, or 10,000? With slashdot's moderation system you'll never know.

      Slashdot could show the full tally (i.e. "437 up votes and 192 down votes") but for some reason they want to use a lobotomized post rating system.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    9. Re:Moderation system by torqer · · Score: 4, Informative

      Slashdot moderation isn't Youtube moderation. Slashdot grants users who have earned amount of Karma, and who visit the site regularly, 5 moderation points.

      Youtube, et al, let every Tom Dick and Harry (and bot) vote.

      The more scarce moderation points should be carrying significantly more meaning than one like, thumbs up, or +1. For me at least, /. isn't about finding the most popular statement. It's about finding the salient arguements around a subject. I'd much rather read 20 +3 comments, than 5 comments with 432154315438 likes. All a like proves is popularity.

      Save the whales [+11564847]

    10. Re:Moderation system by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      Slashdot moderation isn't Youtube moderation. Slashdot grants users who have earned amount of Karma, and who visit the site regularly, 5 moderation points.

      I understand that. Although I visit the site regularly and post stories (some of which are accepted and published) I've never seen or gotten karma. To me it feels as though an elite group is blessed with being able to "rule" on what's liked or not, which isn't necessarily representative of the community's actual take on any given story or comment.

      So yes, I understand how it works, I just don't think it's a very good way to go about it. I also think that not being able to edit a post during a grace period to fix typos and errors is straight out of 1995. Seriously, would it be so awful to be able to have a 5-minute "grace" window to edit a post so we could fix typos or add relevant information?

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    11. Re:Moderation system by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not interested at all in what people who can't be bothered to express their viewpoint think. If anything more than clicking the dislike button is too much effort for you then you've probably not put much thought into the matter in the first place.

    12. Re:Moderation system by maeka · · Score: 2

      I surely can't be in the minority in getting 15 mod points at a time. I have a rather unremarkable account history.

    13. Re:Moderation system by fisted · · Score: 1

      5 moderation points

      Aw, such a low ID and you never got 15 at once?

      --
      CLI paste? paste.pr0.tips!
    14. Re:Moderation system by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      I surely can't be in the minority in getting 15 mod points at a time. I have a rather unremarkable account history.

      It may just be that I'm an idiot, lol. If I had mod points to give out, where would I see them or how would I know I had them?

      I see no indication on the posts or names or anything that would indicate I had mod points. Hell, for all I know I have some and don't know it. Like I said, it may just be that I'm an idiot (that's the usual explanation, according to my wife).

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    15. Re:Moderation system by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If anything more than clicking the dislike button is too much effort for you then you've probably not put much thought into the matter in the first place.

      It has nothing to do with effort.
      If someone makes a good post, I upvote it. We don't need 1,000 additional posts all saying the same exact thing or quoting the original with "I Agree!" tacked on the end. All it does is clutter a comment section.
      If there are 100 posts all saying basically the same thing, and I don't agree or I want to add my own comment on it, I will do so ONCE, and then downvote all the other redundant posts. I'm not going to spam the section with an individual reply to every single one.
      There are times when a post is inflammatory or possibly wrong in so many ways that it's not worth the time and space attempting to directly address it.

      I'm not interested at all in what people who can't be bothered to express their viewpoint think.

      Well then Good News! Those people aren't actually expressing their viewpoint, so there's no way it can bother you.

    16. Re:Moderation system by maeka · · Score: 2

      you should meta-moderate if you've never been given mod points.

    17. Re:Moderation system by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you can see how many points were used, just click on the score, it gives a beautiful tabulated summary. I think you are looking for reddit.

    18. Re:Moderation system by zennyboy · · Score: 1

      "14 moderator points expire 2015-09-24."

      my current status. Used one, of course...

    19. Re:Moderation system by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      you should meta-moderate if you've never been given mod points.

      Okay, help me out here..."meta-moderate"...? How?

      What should I see (and where) in the interface if I do have those magical mod points to give out?

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    20. Re:Moderation system by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      Save the whales [+11564847]

      Save the whales...collect the entire set!

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    21. Re:Moderation system by ioErr · · Score: 1

      That's nice and all, but nothing of what you said explains why it's a problem that Slashdot doesn't give you a numeric score describing how controversial a post is.

    22. Re:Moderation system by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Something I notice is that a lot of sites sort comments by 'most popular' by default. The first few posters inevitably get the most likes because they're the most visible from the start and nobody else really gets to say anything.

    23. Re:Moderation system by antdude · · Score: 1

      But for hardcore /.ers who come too much don't get moderation points. Yes, I'm one/1 of them! :(

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    24. Re:Moderation system by maeka · · Score: 1

      What should I see (and where) in the interface if I do have those magical mod points to give out?

      You'll have a notification on every page's sidebar that you have points, and a drop-down under ever comment (in threads you haven't posted in) if you have points. There is no mystery. If you are uncertain then you don't.

    25. Re:Moderation system by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      You'll have a notification on every page's sidebar that you have points, and a drop-down under ever comment (in threads you haven't posted in) if you have points. There is no mystery. If you are uncertain then you don't.

      Thank you for the explanation...I must not have mod points since I see nothing like that in my sidebar or anywhere else.

      (I looked through all the slashdot FAQs and stuff earlier but saw no real explanation of what I would see if I had 'em.)

      Thanks, maeka! (Obligatory "If I had mod points, they'd be yours", heh)

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    26. Re:Moderation system by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 1

      I usually meta-moderate after each comment I post, and seldom get mod points anymore. Not sure if it's that great of a remedy.

      --
      Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
    27. Re:Moderation system by maeka · · Score: 1

      What you're describing is the opposite end (from OP) of the bell curve (meta-moderating to an extreme level) and it is well known that the closer one is to an "average" user the more mod points one gets.

  2. Stealing candy from a kid by rodrigoandrade · · Score: 1

    Seriously? These idiots are boasting that they scam... Facebook users, which are mostly non-tech people, like soccer moms, pre-teens, and the elderly?

    1. Re:Stealing candy from a kid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      At least they caught these guys. One got sloppy and included his personal email address on another page on the same website.

  3. I'm not quite sure by Psychotria · · Score: 1

    I dislike this story. Where's the big red button that tricks me into pressing it? I'll press it willingly.

  4. Just block the malicious site, end of story... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: Easy enough to do inside your hosts file when it's served up by host-domain name (most of these malicious sites are that way vs. being served by IP address, & IF it's done that way? Block it in a firewall rule!).

    * Pretty simple...

    APK

    P.S.=> I haven't read the article: Hopefully it's one of a quality level that has that type of information in it (the actual payload threat source(s) listed): Otherwise, face facts - If not, then it's really not that practically useful (since it's not informing you of what you need to defend yourself against it & the threat payloads it carries) other than reporting it's going on... apk

  5. Whats the next Facebook by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now that it's become MySpace?

  6. It is not the first time by ruir · · Score: 1

    As the comment says. Fake dislike scams have existed for ages. Those people are dumb. I actually even doubt this is newsworthy.

    1. Re:It is not the first time by LaurenCates · · Score: 2

      I remember at some point in the last two years or so someone put up a poll whose question was "Do you want me not to de-friend you?" or something to that effect. And then I started seeing it pop up everywhere on my feed. So, I looked into it. An angry post from me followed to the effect of: "okay, people, cool it. You know that this is a poll, and it really isn't directed at you, and was probably started by someone you didn't know? Okay, so stop responding to it!"

      Another was more recent: over a recent holiday weekend, there was a post that someone put up saying that a certain pickup truck (pictured) with a certain license plate was driving around our town (which was named in the post) and picking up dogs to be used as bait for dog fights (in this town, it's almost strange if you don't have a dog). This developed some traction among my group of friends, except for the most skeptical of us: the truck was pictured but no surrounding area; the license plate was not identified from any particular state, and the township police's Facebook page (which fairly regularly reports on local crime) didn't post anything.

      Point I'm making here is that people seem to get stirred up about things without actually investigating. If you can find something that a great number of people are invested in (like Facebook or pets), you can quickly find a way to get people all kinds of worked up and bypass critical thinking skills in the process.

      --
      Some people don't believe in fairies. I don't believe in The Patriarchy.
    2. Re:It is not the first time by torqer · · Score: 2

      Wow. The trusted source of truth for a township is a Facebook page. I don't mean it as a slight to the commenter, it's probably very accurate, it just is amazing to me what the world has become.

      I feel old.

    3. Re:It is not the first time by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      As the comment says. Fake dislike scams have existed for ages. Those people are dumb. I actually even doubt this is newsworthy.

      Well, you've seen the "news", right? This is newsworthy because it's happening to some people on facebook. It's probably worth a reminder that people are idiots. What kind of person thinks they need to download a website feature from a third party? I get why someone would think they would need to download an installer for an add-on that gave some site functionality, that's not outside the realm of possibility even to an educated user. But to think that they should get it from randomsiteinthecloud.com instead of facebook.com (in this case) is just bananas.

      This is exactly like scams which have been on fb in the past, but there are two reasons why it's happening to people again anyway. One, new members all the time. Two, facebook barely shows you any of what the people you're following are posting.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    4. Re:It is not the first time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Another was more recent: over a recent holiday weekend, there was a post that someone put up saying that a certain pickup truck (pictured) with a certain license plate was driving around our town (which was named in the post) and picking up dogs to be used as bait for dog fights (in this town, it's almost strange if you don't have a dog). This developed some traction among my group of friends, except for the most skeptical of us: the truck was pictured but no surrounding area; the license plate was not identified from any particular state, and the township police's Facebook page (which fairly regularly reports on local crime) didn't post anything.

      I've seen that same exact thing posted by friends from Alaska, California, several MidWest states, and the East coast. All supposedly within a single week. As if some rogue dogfighting ring is using a single, magical truck to teleport all over the country and snatch dogs out of people's back yards.
      Because you know, getting dogs to fuck and have puppies would be SO hard for an organized, hard-core, dogfighting ring to figure out. (eyeroll)

    5. Re:It is not the first time by ruir · · Score: 1

      I get so fed up with shit post as images, I just block images in facebook in my Mac. Pity in the iPhone, it does not do that, maybe I will suggest it to the authors.

    6. Re:It is not the first time by ruir · · Score: 1

      People can be very daft. I remember a friend complaining about their computers being SLOW. Somewhat they sent me a link to a font to install with funny symbols...I installed in a VM and IMMEDIATELY the computer almost went to a halt. How hard would be to figure out it was that file had a malware payload I wonder...

  7. Another entry in the long saga by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    of Facebook being populated by self-centered twits. Surprising.

  8. Re:Just block the malicious site, end of story... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Yes, blocking facebook is a good idea.

  9. My point's not facebook, it's the payload site by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject: Whatever address thing redirects you to for it's malicious payload's what you'd block...

    APK

    P.S.=> I suppose you COULD block it that way, blocking out facebook IF it's being abused thus, but that wasn't my point... apk

  10. "Hey, I'm related to an African Monarch!" by rmdingler · · Score: 1

    Stupid internet explorers are not in the minority.

    --
    Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

    Ernest Hemingway

  11. Marching morons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Small wonder. Half the world population has an IQ below 100 and Facebook is a haven for those.
    Let the con-men have at them, they deserve it.

  12. Facebook Users by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

    Once again, Facebook users provide a never-ending source of gullible suckers who will click on ANYTHING given the slightest encouragement.

    Reason #32,461,273 why Facebook is a bad idea for the unwary, the unwise, and people with a propensity to click on everything they see.

    Maybe someday I'll get a Facebook account so I can be exploited by advertisers and malware authors. I almost feel like I'm cheating them by not having an account.

    --
    Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
  13. Not me by Buchenskjoll · · Score: 1

    My Facebook dislike has not been exploited

    --
    -- Make America hate again!
  14. What? by U2xhc2hkb3QgU3Vja3M · · Score: 1
    Never mind the usual Facebook hate and how Facebook users are stupid. We may not use it but we all know people who do. So the real question is:

    Once the unsuspecting victim selects a link, they are led to a malicious website, which enables access to their private Facebook accounts and allows the hackers to share further scam links on their behalf.

    How the hell does clicking on a fucking link enable access to a private Facebook account?

  15. Zuck Didn't Say Dislike by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Funny how many news outlets didn't bother to listen to what Zuck said. He never said they were working on a 'Dislike'. He simply said they were working on a button to allow users to show a feeling other than 'Like'. They won't release a Dislike button.

  16. EXTRA EXTRA - STUPID PEOPLE FALL FOR STUPID TRICK by wardrich86 · · Score: 1

    What's the point even... FB is a cesspool of stupidity. We've got people borrowing phones and writing statuses saying they've "hacked" their friend's account. We've got people that think sharing and liking will save a life or make them rich. We've got people that will click any and every link they see.

    How is this news at all? It's just the same old story of stupid people falling for incredibly obvious (and stupid) tricks.

  17. Meh by deviated_prevert · · Score: 1

    I suggest that faceplant institutes a third button for commenting on posts and call it MEH. A more considerate naming choice than a WGAS button. (who gives a shit) which is what most posts on faceplant usually deserve. After all, who really cares if your grandmothers cat hoiked up a giant hair ball that looked like a cooked Johnsonville Brat sausage this morning, replete with pictures!

    --
    This message was not sent from an iPhone because Peter Sellers really was a deviated prevert without a dime for the call
    1. Re:Meh by toonces33 · · Score: 1

      It sounds like a good idea, but I would have to sign up for faceplant in order to use it.

  18. Like with anything else by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anything that is news turns into phishing, not only Facebooks's dislike option. Earthquakes, false celestial events, Bill Gates' fortune, you name it.

  19. But, but, but, by NetNed · · Score: 2

    "The button is big, red, and blinking "push me!!". Seems totally legit to me" says that guy in my office.