Inept phishing

[altivo]

More and more of the spam e-mail I actually see consists of phishing attempts of one sort or another. Whether this is because the other kinds of spam are declining or just that they are easier for the spam traps to filter out, I don't really know.

Occasionally (and with increasing frequency) I see phishing spam that is so ineptly and maladroitly created that I can't believe even the lowest of morons would fall for it. Witness today's example behind cut if you wish.

Return-Path: <admin@security.com>
Received: from noehlo.host ([127.0.0.1])
by mx-herron.atl.sa.earthlink.net (EarthLink SMTP Server) with SMTP id 1i3eFZ5VS3Nl34a3; Tue, 26 Jun 2007 13:18:03 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from omta05ps.mx.bigpond.com ([144.140.83.195])
by mx-herron.atl.sa.earthlink.net (EarthLink SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 1i3eFX7Bh3Nl34a0
for <...>; Tue, 26 Jun 2007 13:18:02 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from oaamta07ps.mx.bigpond.com ([203.42.215.234])
by omta05ps.mx.bigpond.com with ESMTP
id <20070626171800.IQEM1743.omta05ps.mx.bigpond.com@oaamta07ps.mx.bigpond.com>;
Tue, 26 Jun 2007 17:18:00 +0000
Received: from mail.swimming.org.au ([203.42.215.234])
by oaamta07ps.mx.bigpond.com with ESMTP
id <20070626171800.FESX5648.oaamta07ps.mx.bigpond.com@mail.swimming.org.au>;
Tue, 26 Jun 2007 17:18:00 +0000
Received: from User ([220.232.155.10]) by mail.swimming.org.au with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959);
Wed, 27 Jun 2007 03:21:16 +1000
From: "Amazon.com"<admin@security.com>
Subject: New email address added to your account!
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2007 01:17:56 +0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="Windows-1251"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Message-ID: <asiserverkfqrwgg5oo000001dd@mail.swimming.org.au>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 26 Jun 2007 17:21:17.0171 (UTC) FILETIME=[67AFBC30:01C7B816]
X-ELNK-Received-Info: spv=0;
X-ELNK-AV: 0
X-ELNK-Info: sbv=0; sbrc=.0; sbf=0b; sbw=000;

You have added richard.fr@yahoo.com as a new email address for your Flagstar Bank account.

If you did not authorize this change or if you need assistance with your account, please contact Amazon.Inc customer service at:

http://203.237.176.3/EPageCampus/amz/index.html

Thank you for using Amazon.Inc!
The Amazon.Inc Team !

Please do not reply to this e-mail. Mail sent to this address cannot be answered. For assistance, log in to your Amazon account and choose the "Help" link in the header of any page.


It appears to me that we have spammers who are the equivalent of the "script kiddies", using some sort of script provided by (or sold to them, more likely, by another scam artist) that is supposed to help them make tens of thousands a week by phishing for suckers. And they understand so little of how the scheme works that they make fools of themselves like this. A message "from" Amazon that has no amazon domain at all in the routing trace, nor in the return address, and telling you not about an Amazon account issue but rather about Flagstar Bank? And encouraging you to click a link that isn't even thinly disguised? Anyone stupid enough to fall for this sort of crap deserves to have their bank account vacuumed out, their brains removed through an eyedropper (assuming they can be found), and their identity stolen (but who would want it?)

Comments

[baphnedia.livejournal.com]

ROFL!

[altivo.livejournal.com]

Indeed.

[duskwuff.livejournal.com]

I dunno... the real booby prize has to go to the spammers that forget to turn on variable substitution and end up with things like

Dear %NAME
Please buy our %PRODUCT at %URL
%STUFF
%JUNK
%NONSENSE

[altivo.livejournal.com]

Oh, those are a special case, along with the ones who send out repeated messages with no text body at all, just headers proclaiming themselves to be from Wells Fargo Bank, Amazon, or PayPal.

[lobowolf.livejournal.com]

I get stuff like that all the time. Don't they realize that most people are suspicious when they get a message from a bank that they don't have an account with?

Still, for every 1000 e-mails they send out, they must still get one or two people to respond. Not good.

They'd probably have a lot better luck if they could actually spell.

[altivo.livejournal.com]

Yes, the spelling and grammar errors in the typical phishing attempt would be laughable if they weren't so pitiful. We are supposed to believe that these are supercriminals who know all the ins and outs of international banking, wire transfers, etc. Yet they can't read and write?

[atomicat.livejournal.com]

I consider it to be a kind of financial Darwinism.

[altivo.livejournal.com]

Except that spam is now eating up a huge percentage of the total internet bandwidth. If it's natural selection, we're all being pressured to do something about it.

[heavens-steed.livejournal.com]

I'd probably be dumb enough to fall for it.

[altivo.livejournal.com]

I don't think so. If you were, your identity would already have been stolen 6.023 x 10²³ times. ;p

[marzolan.livejournal.com]

Oh, just make it 6.022 x 10²³. Avogadro would be proud.

[altivo.livejournal.com]

I was using Avocado's number. And here's a question for you to ponder: Just how much would Avocado's number of avocados weigh? Would it exceed the mass of the earth?

[marzolan.livejournal.com]

You had a rounding error then. it's 6.022, not 6.023. More specifically it's 6.0221415 x 10²³.

And weight and mass are very different things, asking me to compare them is silly.

[altivo.livejournal.com]

Weight and mass are related in a consistent manner and you can indeed derive one from the other. Speaking of the weight of the earth is ambiguous, however, while it's easy to figure out the weight of the average avocado.

Note that I said "Avocado" not "Avogadro". It's an old joke, from when I was an undergrad, so probably you haven't encountered it. Since 6.022 x 10²³ is less symmetrical to the mind than 6.023 is, we referred to the latter with it's slight difference as "Avocado's number". For everyday purposes, it's close enough, even if it doesn't quite work in your chemistry lab. Note that they both round to 6.02 in any case. ;p

And if for some reason it still isn't obvious, the entire thread was facetious.

[marzolan.livejournal.com]

Meh, i was speed reading and didn't notice the difference in spelling. *shrugs* And yes Tivo, I am quite aware of what the thread is. I may not can read correctly, but I'd be really stupid to take this too seriously. :p

[altivo.livejournal.com]

Ha. You know I don't think you're stupid or anything like.

Just to carry the absurdity to its final conclusion, we did the math here.

Very roughly speaking:

The mass of the earth is about 6 x 10²⁴ kg.

The mass of the avocado I pulled from the fridge here is 6 oz. or about one sixth of a kg. Hence

1/6 * 6 * 10²³ = 1 * 10²³

And thus

One "mole" of avocados has only 1/60th the mass of the planet.

If you make the avocados into guacamole, the pits and skins are removed which reduces the mass even more. And I conclude that a mole of guacamole is about 1/80th of the mass of the earth.

There. Now I'll let you recover from my absurdities.

[marzolan.livejournal.com]

*laughs*
Ok, yeah, that's taking it further than i would have.

[cabcat.livejournal.com]

There'll always be the stupid, the desperate and the greedy to fall for these things.

[altivo.livejournal.com]

Maybe. But why do we have to let them waste more than half the bandwidth of the internet with their pitiful attempts?

[cabcat.livejournal.com]

Oh I didn't say we should, but until the twits wake up and stop falling for these things or extremely fast action is taken against them then there's going to be a lot of them.