Re: [PCWorks] Somebody faked my e-mail address
- From: Peter Kaulback <peter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: pcworks@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2008 19:02:04 -0500
In case you missed this big piece of news about shutting down spammers
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2008/11/spam_volumes_drop_by_23_after.html
and the decline in spam volume by two thirds.
And, as it's been widely known for a long time the USA continues to be
#1 source of spam on the planet. According to security firm Network Box
the USA sends out 15% of all spam and 13% of all virus's, more than
double it's closest junk mail rival, Turkey
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/02/29/botnet_spam_deluge/
Peter Kaulback
Clint Hamilton-PCWorks Admin wrote:
> First off, the only thing that's technically illegal is sending
> Spam, and only by the billions. There is no law for
> "slandering" a person's email address (or slandering a company
> by posing as the company that is sending them) which is the
> subject of this thread.
>
> But to continue on with Spam since you brought it up.....being
> technically "illegal", then finding the authorities that
> actually have a backbone and will actually DO SOMETHING about
> it, are two totally different things. Finding hits in a search
> engine for a search phrase, and finding the precedents where
> something was actually DONE, are two totally different things.
> To date, there has been only ONE person prosecuted under the
> anti-spam law, and only because he sent countless BILLIONS of
> UCE's. I personally have filed numerous complaints with my
> local District Attorney's offices (for both various email and
> phone harassment), and NOT ONCE did they ever follow up or even
> call back! I've also filed countless police reports locally
> AND in the local domicile of the parasite....NOTHING. They
> simply do not care.
>
> Window dressing, eye candy. Here in the USA, there may be
> laws, but they are not enforced. The Gov't here creates
> similar laws all the time by the thousands, just to be ignored.
> And in the unlikely rare event you CAN find someone that
> actually cares, the scumbag will get some bottom-feeding lawyer
> that will get them off on a "technicality", so they can
> continue on with their rein of cyber-terror and cyber-crimes.
> Or, some spastic judge (as you cited) that's more concerned
> with the 1st Amendment that people's legit law-abiding
> businesses and well being.
>
> I see it all the time, I've lived it, I know. Sure, there may
> be "laws", however, Laws are USELESS without the people with
> the backbone that will ENFORCE them. It's going to take
> (someone like me?) to get several thousand people to march on
> Capitol Hill in D.C. that will create enough of a media frenzy,
> to get the Gov't to actually TAKE some action against these
> parasites, or a class-action lawsuit against the Gov't for
> failure to enforce. Why do you think they still do it? Still
> spam? Still commit the internet fraud? Still spoof/slander
> businesses and people's email addresses? Simply because, they
> CAN.
>
> Drastic times, desperate measures. Fight back the only way we
> know how. I, and others that have also experienced these
> atrocities first hand, will consider the Gov't as "caring" when
> they actually start prosecuting and delivering JAIL TIME for
> these pieces of excrement.
> -Clint
>
> God Bless
> Clint Hamilton, Owner
> http://www.OrpheusComputing.com
> http://www.ComputersCustomBuilt.com
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "David Grossman"
>
>
>
> It is illegal, Clint.
>
> Google gives "about" 1,030,000 hits at
> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=anti-spam+laws&aq=2&oq=anti-spam+
> for
> "anti-spam laws." That shows that the government does care.
>
> Some of these laws are detailed at
> http://www.spamlaws.com/spam-laws.html
>
> Unfortunately, there are still problems. We're not out of the
> woods yet. The
> Washington Post recently reported, at
> http://voices.washingtonpost.com/securityfix/2008/09/virginia_anti-spam_law_
> overtur.html , that "The Virginia Supreme Court today struck
> down a state
> anti-spam law, saying the statute violated the First Amendment
> right to free
> and anonymous speech. The decision also tossed out the
> conviction of a North
> Carolina man once described as one of the most prolific
> spammers."
>
> That Virginia case proved that anti-spam legislation is still
> not perfect.
> However, it is in place, and it is improving all the time. It's
> important to
> press the legislators to put through even stricter laws.
>
> Furthermore, althought the Virginia law was struck down, it
> does not mean
> that the government does not care. To the contrary - the
> government did
> create the law. That means that they do care. Now they will
> have to re-write
> the existing law so that it will be constitutional, and they
> will have to
> pass the new law.
>
> David Grossman
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>
>> It's NOT illegal, THAT is the problem. The Gov't here
>> doesn't
>> care, nor does any other country. Fight fire with fire. I
>> speak from much experience.....unfortunately.
>> -Clint
>>
>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "David Grossman"
>>
>>
>> Two reasons why I don't think that will work, Clint:
>>
>> 1. By sending them spam and trial subscriptions, we are
>> lowering ourselves
>> to their level, and thereby lowering our own self-esteem and
>> self-worth. We
>> may or may not stop them, but the price may be too high for
>> decent people
>> like us to bear.
>>
>> 2. If what they are doing is illegal, then when we do the
>> same
>> thing it
>> would also be illegal. The difference is that they know how
>> to
>> carry out
>> their nefarious activities without getting caught, and we
>> don't
>> know the
>> tricks of their trade. They won't get caught. We will get
>> caught. It's not
>> worth it.
>>
>> David Grossman
>>
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> In short Dale, there's nothing you can really do because
>>> it's
>>> likely this kind of cyber-terrorist scum is sending these
>>> attacks from one of those cyber-terrorist criminal internet
>>> cafes out of the USA, or using a email header forging
>>> program.
>>> All you can TRY to do: is you MUST get the full email
>>> headers
>>> in order to report it, but that's likely to be futile due
>>> to
>>> what I said above, and in the unlikely event they ARE from
>>> a
>>> REAL PC; it's from Europe (RIPE), Asia (APNIC) or S.
>>> America
>>> (LACNIC) the ISP's there don't care because they're in on
>>> this
>>> type of state-sponsored cyber-terrorism.
>>>
>>> You MIGHT, POSSIBLY, be able to do something if the email
>>> headers are not forged, and are based in the USA. But you
>>> have
>>> no way of knowing if the headers are real or fake. If the
>>> originating IP shows it's based in the USA, it's slightly
>>> more
>>> likely they MIGHT be real, but still not very likely.
>>>
>>> As Phil mentioned, contrary to all ISP's TOS/TOA policies,
>>> they
>>> DO CONDONE this kind of behavior, ignore it and turn a
>>> blind
>>> eye to it. And, SpamCop IS IN ON IT. For over a decade
>>> I've
>>> been telling those idiots at SpamCop the addresses to which
>>> they are "allegedly reporting" these kinds of atrocities
>>> are
>>> BOGUS--either no longer valid or NEVER WERE in use! I have
>>> even PROVIDED THEM with the real addresses! They don't
>>> care,
>>> they just keep using the same bogus reporting email
>>> addresses
>>> making the unsuspecting SC user think that something is
>>> actually being done.
>>>
>>> What you have to do is take matters into your own hands,
>>> but
>>> again that could only help IF the email headers are real
>>> and
>>> not forged, and several other things have to fall into
>>> place
>>> for you: For example, if the emails have a website's URL
>>> in
>>> it, and IF, IF, IF, the whois information on the domain is
>>> NOT
>>> bogus (they usually are bogus, something also that is "not
>>> allowed" by registrar's TOS/TOA yet they condone it), you
>>> can
>>> find ways of attacking the domain owner. Subscribe their
>>> email
>>> address to every kind of BS you can find, and have all
>>> sorts
>>> of
>>> ridiculous things sent to their street address. For their
>>> name, use something additional like "cyber-terrorist
>>> parasite",
>>> then when they get all these emails sent to them, trial
>>> magazine subscriptions, vacuum cleaner free trials, etc.,
>>> etc.,
>>> it will be addressed to "Cyber-terrorist parasite", and
>>> they'll
>>> also have to handle the return of all these products and
>>> cancellation of magazine subscriptions. Be sure and pick
>>> some
>>> "really choice" magazines and products. Magazines like
>>> "Ge*nital Acne Quarterly", "Closet Cross-Dresser", etc.,
>>> they'll have to cancel (or will they?? HA!! No they don't
>>> exist....at least not to my knowledge, but you get my
>>> point),
>>> LOL. Products like "personal pleasure enhancement
>>> products"
>>> that have "send no money now, we'll bill you later" promos,
>>> preferably from places like "Nadine's House of Pleasure"
>>> that
>>> have really descriptive shipping boxes. ROTFLMAO.
>>> Hopefully
>>> they'll have really nosy gossipy neighbors and a nosy
>>> gossiping
>>> mailman/delivery person that will also make their life a
>>> hell.
>>>
>>> You also immediately tell your ISP about this in efforts to
>>> thwart any complaints about against you. That's in the
>>> unlikely event your ISP actually does anything about
>>> spammers
>>> and cyber-terrorism.
>>> -Clint
=========================
The list's FAQ's can be seen by sending an email to
PCWorks-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with FAQ in the subject line.
To unsubscribe, subscribe, set Digest or Vacation to on or off, go to
//www.freelists.org/list/pcworks . You can also send an email to
PCWorks-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with Unsubscribe in the subject line. Your
member list settings can be found at
//www.freelists.org/cgi-bin/lsg2.cgi/l=pcworks . Once logged in, you have
access to numerous other email options.
The list archives are located at //www.freelists.org/archives/pcworks/ .
All email posted to the list will be placed there in the event anyone needs to
look for previous posts.
-zxdjhu-
Other related posts:
