Microsoft does something cool

Microsoft has filed 117 lawsuits against "phishers", people who run scams to steal people's credit cards, bank accounts, identities, etc. This is good, because phishing has been a problem for a long, long, time and no major company has ever done anything to try to stop it on this scale.

---------

http://money.cnn.com/2005/03/31/technology...dex.htm?cnn=yes

Microsoft sues 117 over 'phishing'

Software maker files lawsuits in bid to keep swindlers from getting personal, consumer information.

March 31, 2005: 2:25 PM EST

SEATTLE (Reuters) - Microsoft Corp. has filed 117 lawsuits against unknown Internet site operators who used "phishing" schemes to obtain personal and financial information from unsuspecting consumers, the world's largest software maker said Thursday.

Often scam artists pose as banks or other legitimate businesses, sending out millions of e-mails or pop-up Web advertisements with requests that the recipient update their account information but instead direct them to fake sites.

Redmond, Washington-based Microsoft said it was filing "John Doe" defendant lawsuits in U.S. District Court in Washington state in an attempt to establish connections between worldwide "phishers" and discover the largest-volume operators.

"We must work together to stop these con artists from misusing the Internet as a tool for fraud," Aaron Kornblum, Internet safety enforcement attorney at Microsoft, said in a statement.

Microsoft has been engaged in a three-year fight against virus writers, hackers, spammers and Internet scam artists, saying that any harm against personal computer users could hurt Windows, the operating system that runs on more than 90 percent of the world's PCs.

Microsoft was joined by officials from the Federal Trade Commission and the National Consumers League who used the lawsuits and Friday's April Fool's day to encourage consumers to beware of these online schemes.

"Phishing is more than a dirty trick played on unsuspecting consumers -- it's a serious identity theft problem," said Susan Grant, director of the National Consumers League's National Fraud Information Center and Internet Fraud Watch program.

Some scams are becoming more sophisticated, with some including what looks like a legitimate Internet address link but once clicked on by the user, they are instead directed to a different, fraudulent site asking for personal information.

Earlier this week, Microsoft said it was working on a new identity system for Windows that would store users' personal information on desktops and keep them secure when they shop or access services online.

The officials encouraged consumers to be suspicious of unexpected e-mails seeking personal data, to not click on links in those e-mails, and verify contacts from institutions that claim a person is a victim of identity theft.

Microsoft (up $0.04 to $24.20, Research) shares edged higher in afternoon trading on Nasdaq.

mICROSOFT HAS DONE SOMETHING COOL FOR ONCE?

THE ONLY REASON YOU'RE ON THE FUCKING INTERNET IS BECAUSE OF MICROSOFT.

Shut up you fucking loser.

Originally posted by bobthebuilder@Mar 31 2005, 07:49 PM

mICROSOFT HAS DONE SOMETHING COOL FOR ONCE?

 

THE ONLY REASON YOU'RE ON THE FUCKING INTERNET IS BECAUSE OF MICROSOFT.

Quoted post

Actually this man is the reason we are on the internet...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3357073.stm

Your retarded ramble is like saying Delta Airlines is the reason we have flight,..

i miss the days of IM punting and chatroom lagging.

Isn't Al Gore the reason we're on the internet?

No, not really, he just takes all the credit for the internet. I though microsoft was going after people who listen to phish. They should. The should kill them.

sHUT THE FUCK UP HIPPY AL GORE IS THE REASON!!! i'M VERY OPINIONATED AND UNINFORMED AND I WAS IN THE ARMY SO I'M ALWAYS RIGHT SISSY ASSHOLE FAGG YOUR YOUR YOUR YOUR DUMB

SHUT YOU'RE MOUTH

As much as I hate all of the spam and phishing that annoys me to death, I can't help but wonder how this type of law enforcement expands microsofts power in the government sector. Already with Halliburton in unholy symbiosis with FEMA and getting no bid contracts in Iraq, we are seeing more corporate/government interchangability.... and more steps on the road towards corporatism/fascism.

I am reading "After the Empire" by Emmanuel Todd. This is the man who predicted the fall of the soviet union back in the seventies. But his latest book "After the Empire" is about the decline of the U.S. A very interesting take on the subject in strongly demographic terms as opposed to many of our overly economic viewpoints here in the states.

I'm not sure what this has to do with the subject. Well vaguely relating to what I brought up it mentions the ossification of older democracies, and the establishment of new status quos, which in essence undermine the very principles of democracy. These new status quos could certainly be interpreted as corporate power.

You've got a point, corporations taking control of the law could be a sign of major problems, I didn't really think of it that way. I mean, it's good that SOMEBODY is doing it, because it's been a problem for a long, long time. Of course, Microsoft is only sueing them, they can't send them to jail or anything, this isn't a criminal case.

But I think the real issue is, why hasn't the GOVERNMENT done anything about this? Think about it, 117 phishers and the government couldn't get any of them? If they're high profile enough for Microsoft to get them, you'd think someone else would have gotten to them first.

it reminds me of Mara Salvatrucha, sort of.

the government swiveled it's big ass head over towards terrorism, and forgot about everything else, except terry schiavo apparently.

meanwhile, things start happening that they don't know anything about, like a latin american gang becoming 10,000 strong and people running rampant with identity theft on the net.

the government can't keep up with all the shit it's trying to control.

they should stop worrying about stem cells for two seconds and think about real crime that actually hurts society.

i'm glad gates got involved though.

i don't think so badly of him.

he recently 'anonymously' donated 50million to my university for a malaria research unit, plus all the money he and the wife have given towards aids research and rehab, especially in africa.

he's ok with me.

It's like a fucking corporate police force then.

I can see corporations controlling laws, it's in their best interest. Although only a few corporations are large enough to man handle the government or federal law; as federal power is reduced a lot of the smaller corporations are able to get what they want by threatening to leave the state if they don't have things their way.(deregulation/corporate welfare/substaties) Republicans are always talking about reducing the federal government. Remember when Microsoft was talking about leaving the country during that big trial some years back? I wonder how that would affect our economy if they left the states.

and as far as corporatins taking over law enforcement, look at ALL the private security companies there are, for everything from buildings to homes to gated communities.

much of the Iraq war was outsourced (part of the reason why abu ghraib happened)

http://www.motherjones.com/news/update/200.../we_597_01.html

The Pentagon's Private Corps

From Gaza to Iraq, military contractors are taking over more and more jobs from the military -- a practice that is proving wildly profitable and terribly perilous.

http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/20.../ma_365_01.html

Soldiers of Good Fortune

At a camp in North Carolina, a private firm called Blackwater USA is training the U.S. Navy to fight terrorists, taking the place of military officers who used to fill such roles.

The four Americans horrifically killed on Wednesday by a mob in Fallujah, Iraq, worked for Blackwater USA, a private military company profiled by Barry Yeoman in the May 2003 issue of Mother Jones.

I wish that the source article gave more details about the specifics of the lawsuits, but this again this isn't policing. Microsoft is not arresting these people and can't send them to jail.

And symbols has a point about Bill Gates, he gives a very large amount of money to charity quite often. Now if only Windows wasn't such a piece of shit.

I'm familiar with some of Bill Gates' charity. I don't really think he's a bad guy.... He is after all, the archtypal "nerd who made it big". He has given hope and inspiration to all of us. Going from zero to hero @ ten million Ghz. But he is also a ruthless businessman. I'm not going to pontificate on all of the implications of that and monopolization since there are sites like http://www.fuckmicrosoft.com/ that do a much better job. Sure it may stagnate competition that drives up quality and competition, but under the reign of Bill Gates, it's not so bad. What happens if a not so altruistic king assumes the throne someday? If such power fell into the wrong hands....

Microsoft is no doubt better adapted to deal with threats in the tech industry. After all it's their business, and they follow the money. The government is not so keen on tech issues honestly. You would have to move through tremendous amounts of beauracracy and red tape just to establish what you need.... *if* you can even get allocated the funds to support a cybercrime unit (which the FBI has not been so successful with). Then you have to get the qualified people to do the job. And the qualified people are going to follow the money right back into the private sector. (I have however heard of busted crackers forced into indentured servitude for the government. Sounds strange huh?)

I'm not entirely against some technocratic ideas, especially as far as such specialization and subject matter knowledge goes... But to have these specialists running the affairs of government? I don't think so.... We would see even worse crony capitalism than we are currently experiencing. Probably a board of technocratic advisors to government would be better I should think.

Yeah republicans always want to shrink the government because it interferes with their business. Alot of republicans think that the market is self correcting, but from what I've seen, businesses will put out the lowest quality product for the highest price they can get away with.... and only the government can protect us from that.... or competition.... but we've all seen how competition is eventually eliminated.... what to do in this age of monopoly?

Originally posted by villain@Apr 1 2005, 02:51 PM

I'm familiar with some of Bill Gates' charity. I don't really think he's a bad guy....

 

(I have however heard of busted crackers forced into indentured servitude for the government. Sounds strange huh?)

 

 

Quoted post

1) While Bill Gates does give to charity, so has every other elite majorly rich person forever. They get tax breaks for one, and once you have so much you stop caring about your bank account and start with your legacy. It's like a video game with cheat codes, you stop caring about beating it and start fucking around because you know you can't lose. I think many other powerful rich people are worse than him, but he is nothing unique in the long line of the ultra wealthy who share some crumbs with the starving masses. His wealth, or more aptly put the ability to generate such an unnessesary proportion of money is part of the reason he has charities to give to.

2) I knew a kid who hacked NYU's system among other things and he told me too that they let him off the hook for hacking other hackers for a bit...whats funny is he was an orthodox jew hacker

Well you know it could be worse. Bill Gates is giving to genuine charities (I think). There are some companies that start foundations so they can essentially donate to themselves.

Yup it gets that fucked up.

I don't hate Bill Gates for being rich, but I hate him for making a monopoly out of computers. Windows isn't even that great.

Originally posted by KING BLING+Apr 1 2005, 04:14 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (KING BLING - Apr 1 2005, 04:14 AM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-bobthebuilder@Mar 31 2005, 07:49 PM

mICROSOFT HAS DONE SOMETHING COOL FOR ONCE?

 

THE ONLY REASON YOU'RE ON THE FUCKING INTERNET IS BECAUSE OF MICROSOFT.

Quoted post

Actually this man is the reason we are on the internet...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3357073.stm

Your retarded ramble is like saying Delta Airlines is the reason we have flight,..

[/b]

If you're using WINDOWS then MICROSOSFT is the reason why you are on the internet. Chances are most of you are using windows and most of you are using internet explorer.. which MICROSOFT owns.

No. What about mac, linux, mozilla firefox. People would be on the internet regardless of whether they had windows on their computer or not.

Originally posted by KING BLING@Apr 2 2005, 04:42 AM

1) While Bill Gates does give to charity, so has every other elite majorly rich person forever. They get tax breaks for one, and once you have so much you stop caring about your bank account and start with your legacy. It's like a video game with cheat codes, you stop caring about beating it and start fucking around because you know you can't lose. I think many other powerful rich people are worse than him, but he is nothing unique in the long line of the ultra wealthy who share some crumbs with the starving masses. His wealth, or more aptly put the ability to generate such an unnessesary proportion of money is part of the reason he has charities to give to.

Quoted post

no, this isn't 'donating to charity to get the IRS off your back'

this is HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of dollars given to start whole FOUNDATIONS to combat aids in africa and find new malaria treatments.

these are not crumbs, this is a scientific movement funded by one person.

you can spit in the face of such generosity all you want, but that shows your ignorance, or bitterness, take your pick. !especially! in an age when our government is abandoning scientific research.

and where is the evidence of every rich person giving to charity? talk about making up some bullshit to support your weak argument.

and just so bob knows, i am not on a windows machine, operating system, or web browser.

neither is the majority of the institute in which i work.

Originally posted by ODS-1@Apr 4 2005, 06:49 AM

No. What about mac, linux, mozilla firefox. People would be on the internet regardless of whether they had windows on their computer or not.

Quoted post

Mac and linux are much harder to use. If there would be no IE there would be no mozilla firefox, sorry....

this is a fucking stupid argument.

the internet evolved from a military computer network that was established

by '69 called arpanet. from there it grew slowly but steadily until the early nineties until tim berners lee, in the early nineties, came up with basically what

we are all familiar with now, a browser with hyperlinks, graphical interface, etcetry..the dude didn't work for microsoft or any other computer firm, he was

a physics guy. end of story.

WOuld you say there would be as many people on the internet today if microsoft would not have invented a simple interface?

furthermore, IE is not, and was not the only web browser, and you'll

recall there was a pretty serious browser war in the mid to late 90's.

in fact, when i started using the internet, netscape was the big browser.

your changing your argument, and it's a fruitless exercise anyhow.

Originally posted by Herbivore@Apr 1 2005, 08:24 AM

i miss the days of IM punting and chatroom lagging.

Quoted post

HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA

Originally posted by bobthebuilder@Apr 4 2005, 03:37 PM

WOuld you say there would be as many people on the internet today if microsoft would not have invented a simple interface?

Quoted post

Yes, you fucking brick-headed moron. There's a dozen other ways to use the internet, it just means people would have to learn how, or use Mac's which are just as easy to get on the internet with. And MSIE came much later into the game, which is not only why it sucks more than the other browsers, but it's why it is much more vulnerable to attacks.

But noooo, you can't figure this out because you're thick skull won't let any words in, it only spits them out.

Of course, it makes sense that you'd be in blind, ignorant support of gigantic corporations that hold a crushing monopoly over anything.

Your right, you know everything about every topic and im always wrong.

Mac and linux are much harder to use.

Quoted post

 

…unless you know how to use a mouse and keyboard.

 

Linux uses a graphical user interface (GUI) just like windows does. It's only a matter of figuring out the minor navigation differences. I use debian linux and mozilla firefox; the shit is mad stable. And the install is easy as hell too. Suse is another good one for anyone interested in running linux.