Fake Mark Zuckerbergs Scam Facebook Users Out of Their Cash (nytimes.com)

Hundreds of Facebook and Instagram accounts have been parading as Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and COO Sheryl Sandberg, tricking vulnerable individuals into sending large amounts of money in order to collect bogus lottery winnings, the New York Times reports [Editor's note: the link may be paywalled]. From a report: An examination by The New York Times found 205 accounts impersonating Mr. Zuckerberg and Ms. Sandberg on Facebook and its photo-sharing site Instagram, not including fan pages or satire accounts, which are permitted under the company's rules. At least 51 of the impostor accounts, including 43 on Instagram, were lottery scams like the one that fooled Mr. Bernhardt.

The fake Zuckerbergs and faux Sandbergs have proliferated on Facebook and Instagram, despite the presence of Facebook groups that track the scams and complaints about the trick dating to at least 2010. A day after The Times informed Facebook of its findings, the company removed all 96 impostor Mark Zuckerberg and Sheryl Sandberg accounts on its Facebook site. It had left up all but one of the 109 fakes on Instagram, but removed them after this article was published.

Comments

satire accounts are ok?

[vux984]

" satire accounts, which are permitted under the company's rules. "

Really? I thought they had a real name policy that would have prevented 'satire accounts' using other peoples names.

Is that not the case?

Re:satire accounts are ok?

[Narcocide]

You can lie about who you are in the public-facing profile data as long as it falls under the legal definition of satirical use, but you still are required to give your real legal name to the sign-up form when the account is initially created.

Re:satire accounts are ok?

[gnick]

TFA says both that satire accounts are allowed and that users must use their real names. Google led me to a couple of FB pages citing their "real name" policy and their policy against maintaining more than one "personal" account. I couldn't quickly find any mention of satire accounts being allowed.

How do we know they're fake?

[olsmeister]

If I was Zuck or Sandberg, this is exactly how I would scam people to deflect the blame.

Re:How do we know they're fake?

[gnick]

If you were Zuck or Sandberg, you wouldn't need to. The scam they've got going is much better and more-or-less legal.

Re:How do we know they're fake?

[Anonymous Coward]

Wells Fargo didn't need to create millions of fake accounts, but they did.

Re:How do we know they're fake?

[Oswald McWeany]

If I was Zuck or Sandberg, this is exactly how I would scam people to deflect the blame.

Came here to say this. Sounds like something the real 'Bergs would do.

Re:How do we know they're fake?

[rudy_wayne]

tricking vulnerable individuals into sending large amounts of money

So "vulnerable" is the new term for "stupid"?

Re:How do we know they're fake?

[Narcocide]

Please tell me you posted this as a joke. (Just in case it went over anyone else's head; Wells Fargo was recently in the news getting caught proving that "phishing scam" and "actually from the company" are not mutually exclusive.)

Re:How do we know they're fake?

[Anonymous Coward]

Stupid has pretty much always been subset of vulnerable.

Re:How do we know they're fake?

[PPH]

Some outfit calling themselves the IRS is sending me letters, telling me that I owe thousands in back taxes.

Re:How do we know they're fake?

[h4ck7h3p14n37]

At least they asked before opening the account!

How do we know they're fake?

[greenwow]

A coworker got hit by what looked like a phishing scam to open an account with Wells Fargo with a high monthly fee, and it turned out to actually be from the company.

Huh?

[Obfuscant]

If someone thinks that Mark Zuckerberg will be sending them a notice that they won a magical lottery that they hadn't bought an entry in to begin with, then there is nothing that can be done to solve the real problem. (Hint: the real problem is not that Facebook allows people to use the name Mark Zuckerberg.)

A side-problem is the proliferation of professional services where organizations outsource their tasks like email, timesheets, etc, to, so it truly is becoming impossible to determine what is and is not a phishing attack. My university uses outsourced timesheet entry services, so you have to log in using your university credentials to do your monthly timesheet. They use an outsourced mailing list to send donation requests from the University Foundation. The e-purchasing website is off-site. Even if you personally never buy anything through the e-purchasing site, you get email regarding those purchases that way.

The only way to know a phish these days is because of the poor grammar and spelling. If the scammers ever hire native English speakers to write their phishes, we're all toast.

Re:Huh?

[pr0fessor]

My mother got a message from someone claiming to be an employee of facebook saying she had won $10,000 and wanted her bank account information so they could direct deposit the winnings.

She of course didn't respond knowing it was a scam then a couple days later got a message from someone claiming to be with FBI and was trying to catch the scamer. The supposed FBI agent wanted her to give them her bank account information and do what the scamer asked so they could trace the scamer and arrest them.

She also didn't fall for that though she did decide to play with the supposed FBI and asked them to provide a case number for the other FBI agent who had been assigned the case after she initially reported it. Then sent a message to the original scam account asking if they could send a check instead.

They both stopped responding to her.

Re:Huh?

[Carewolf]

If someone thinks that Mark Zuckerberg will be sending them a notice that they won a magical lottery that they hadn't bought an entry in to begin with, then there is nothing that can be done to solve the real problem. (Hint: the real problem is not that Facebook allows people to use the name Mark Zuckerberg.)

A side-problem is the proliferation of professional services where organizations outsource their tasks like email, timesheets, etc, to, so it truly is becoming impossible to determine what is and is not a phishing attack. My university uses outsourced timesheet entry services, so you have to log in using your university credentials to do your monthly timesheet. They use an outsourced mailing list to send donation requests from the University Foundation. The e-purchasing website is off-site. Even if you personally never buy anything through the e-purchasing site, you get email regarding those purchases that way.

The only way to know a phish these days is because of the poor grammar and spelling. If the scammers ever hire native English speakers to write their phishes, we're all toast.

I keep getting emails from a domain called paypal-communications.com.. There is no way I am responding to any emails that doesnt come and have links back to the from the primary domain...

And people use google, facebook or twitter accounts to log on to unrelated websites. When you should NEVER give your password to another site when you are not on that site...

Web-security is truly fucked and the big guys are the ones fucking it up.

tax for being stupid

[Anonymous Coward]

I was duped as well when I was 7 years old. There was a newspaper math puzzle which claimed a "free" prize to reader who send the correct solution. I solved the puzzle and my parents were so excited, they sent it to the scammer. We got a letter saying that I have won portable stereo system and need to send some money to cover for the tax. After we sent that, they asked more money for shipping. By that time, my dad had talked to few people and he was told that this is a scam so we didn't send the shipping money. This was in 70s. Scams like this are happening for ages and stupid people fall for it.

Re:tax for being stupid

[nitehawk214]

I don't blame a 7 year old for getting duped, but your parents are pretty stupid.

I can remember asking my mom, "Why don't you reply to these Publishers Clearinghouse letters? They say you won a million dollars. Look, they have pictures of them giving giant checks to people. It has to be real!"

It was when I learned that, yes, people would just lie to you to make money. She didn't have an answer as to why it was legal. I still have no idea why.

Re:tax for being stupid

[k6mfw]

... Publishers Clearinghouse letters? They say you won a million dollars.

I think they are real but you have to live in a home with a yard to doorway (and in a neighborhood not crowded with parked cars) that provides clearance for camera crews along with lighting and soundman to get the great footage. If you live in a condo or apartment cluster, they will not award you because hallways and stairs impede camera crews.

Re:tax for being stupid

[tlhIngan]

I can remember asking my mom, "Why don't you reply to these Publishers Clearinghouse letters? They say you won a million dollars. Look, they have pictures of them giving giant checks to people. It has to be real!"

It was when I learned that, yes, people would just lie to you to make money. She didn't have an answer as to why it was legal. I still have no idea why.

Because they actually are a legitimate company? And they actually DO award someone a million bucks?

Publishers Clearing House is a direct marketing company - basically they allowed you to subscribe to a few magazines for a single price, usually at a lower rate than subscribing individually. The sweepstakes part was really just a way to gauge interest - if you went through the effort, they assumed you didn't mind and continued to send you stuff.

Now, that didn't mean they didn't do scummy things - like making you believe subscribing would increase your chances or that you were closer than you think to winning. And of course, they bought all the mailing lists they can.

But the sweepstakes were real, and they'd arrive at your door and hand you the check, without demanding any money in return in "taxes" or "handling" (they took that off the money they gave you).

Thus, as far as things went, they were actually legitimate

Re:tax for being stupid

[nitehawk214]

Except they would send letters out claiming you actually did win. (with maybe some fine print saying actually you didn't win)

On the front "CONGRATULATIONS YOU WIN 1000000 DOLLARS"
Inside the letter in fine print "is what you will hear if you actually win". Legal or not, this is how you trick old people in to things.

And, as k6mfw pointed out, ever notice how those commercials with Ed McMahon were always some suburban home with a family with 2.3 children and plenty of room for a camera crew? I am not saying they were fake, I doubt they could hide that. But there is no way in hell those were random.

Real one scams you out of your privacy

[Anonymous Coward]

So the real Zuckerberg scams you out of your privacy and sells you out to the highest bidder. Who’s worse?

Question has to be asked

[SuperKendall]

Looking over the many pictures we have now, *is* there a real Zuckerberg?

Wait, I was told I had to use my real name

[Holi]

But fake accounts are ok!? Why were people forced to switch from pseudonyms to real names?

call me a troll...

[argStyopa]

...but really, I've had enough about trying to protect stupid people from their stupidity.

"...tricking vulnerable individuals into sending large amounts of money in order to collect bogus lottery winnings..."

If "fake Mark Zuckerberg" cons you out of your cash, tough shit.

Look at it this way, for the bulk of human history, if you were that stupid you'd be dead and eaten by a tiger or a bear or fallen off a mountain. Now you just lost some money. Call it a win for you.

Re: call me a troll...

[DNS-and-BIND]

It's about a trust based society. Trust based societies are wonderful places to live. They're the nice places on the planet. People trust each other, and things are great because of it. Non trust based societies are shitholes. People will cheat each other without a second thought, and everyone suffers. When people from these societies come to ours, they think we're gigantic idiots and immediately set about ruining us with cheating, lying, scamming, and so on. They laugh because we're such idiots. You know, like you're doing now.

Re: call me a troll...

[argStyopa]

Protecting yourself IS YOUR PROBLEM.

Seriously, I can't think of a more fundamental lesson from Darwin.

I frankly don't want to live in a society of gullible sheep.

Re:call me a troll...

[oakgrove]

Here's the issue. Peoples' propensity to fall for this kind of thing almost certainly falls on a standard distribution. And like any distribution, there are outliers. I believe in personal responsibility as much as the next guy but the sad fact is, some people are just not equipped to deal with scammers. And we can't just hang them out to dry.

See also: Martin Lewis

[shilly]

https://blog.moneysavingexpert...

Re:See also: Martin Lewis

[Chris Mattern]

My Friend Irma was a pretty good film.

"Fake"

[VeryFluffyBunny]

"fake" Zuckerbergs and Sandbergs, yeah... right. Denying it, are they? I think the cops need to investigate those two more closely.

Not news?

[SeaFox]

There an old saying: "A fool and his money are soon parted"... and there are a lot of fools in this world.
Social networking services that market to the masses will attract a lot of them.

Outsourcing

[jbmartin6]

With this and similar articles coming out all the time ("we found X and reported it to Facebook, who then deleted X"), it seems Facebook has figured out the value in outsourcing its audits. For free even. Zuckerberg's "AI" is here a decade early.

LOL!

[MerlTurkin]

Facebooktards never learn!

Fake Mark Zuckerbergs?

[nospam007]

Is there any other kind?

Good Job That Bill Gates...

[Luthair]

still owes them all that money for forwarding those emails!

how do they fall for this?

[jlv]

"I got all excited. Wouldn’t you?” said Mr. Bernhardt, 67, a retired forklift driver and Army veteran in Ham Lake, Minn. He stayed up until dawn trading messages with the person on the other end. To obtain his winnings, he was told, he first needed to send $200 in iTunes gift cards.

I'd have sent the gift cards, I'm sure, but I'd already sent them all to the IRS to avoid them rushing over to my house to arrest me.

Suckerbergs

[kackle]

Are the victims called "suckerbergs"?

All is as it should be...

[hyades1]

This is just Baby Jesus' gentle way of letting you know you have too much money.