One might argue that, considering most people who receive email still respond to phishing attacks (I cannot quote the number off-hand, but I know it was recently posted on a major), that any other seemingly innocuous information could be used to fashion target-specific phishing attacks. It seems probable that a regular person (my grandmother, aunt, father, etc.), already succeptible to scams, would be doubly so if transaction/account/address-specific information were included. All scams rely on the illusion of credibility and the addition of ANY specific information, regardless of source, gives credence to what should be dismissed offhand.
Slashdot Mirror
One might argue that, considering most people who receive email still respond to phishing attacks (I cannot quote the number off-hand, but I know it was recently posted on a major), that any other seemingly innocuous information could be used to fashion target-specific phishing attacks. It seems probable that a regular person (my grandmother, aunt, father, etc.), already succeptible to scams, would be doubly so if transaction/account/address-specific information were included. All scams rely on the illusion of credibility and the addition of ANY specific information, regardless of source, gives credence to what should be dismissed offhand.