Another chat with Rod was captured by listening devices today: hear it here.
Today we had definite opinions on how families should be agreeing on ground rules for using tech – and some tips for tools and toys for making family life a little smoother.
I enjoyed catching up with Rod in a cafe earlier this week to have a chat about technology and The Facebook. I suspect there were listening devices in this particular cafe, because it appears the entire conversation has been recorded and posted online. I knew I should have checked my privacy settings.
It seems I enjoy the prospect of JD‘s morning coffee more than my privacy, so there’ll be more conversations each Wednesday morning at Sonshine fm – I’m a sucker for a cuppa. You can join by SMS or Phone or Facebook or any of a number of other avenues we’ll be discussing in coming weeks.
Long story short – if you receive phone calls from people you don’t know, claiming to know your computer is broken and needs fixing, finish the call quickly. It’s a ‘phishing‘ scam.
Alternatively, if you have a few minutes spare, record yourself wasting their valuable time, as I did earlier today.
Having received a few phone calls from ‘the Windows Service Center’ recently, and after asking them politely not to call with their crazy story a few times before, I decided to see if I could be removed from their list by deliberately wasting their time. It took 20 minutes to find out their latest tricks, and have them hang up on me for a change.
These calls are full of technical nonsense-speak, and designed to allow the trickster to gain control of your computer for, at best, an excuse to bill you for unneeded service charges, and at worst, access to private information like banking details or enlisting your computer in a botnet.
In today’s call, I followed a few of their more harmless instructions. I was expecting this to be a version of the ‘Event Viewer Scam’ which is well-known online. This one is a little different – I’m calling it an ‘INF-Ammyy’ version because of the specific techniques they used. You can replay the full call below.
This version follows the usual structure of the scam:
The caller attempts to convince you that your computer is suffering some sort of malady
The caller walks you through unfamiliar parts of your computer system and observes that what you are seeing “with your own eyes” is indeed as terrible as they predicted, if not worse!
The caller asks you to run software on your system to allow a technician to connect and fix the files
In some cases, credit card is information is sought to allow a service charge to be billed
The new aspects of this scam:
The caller shows you around the contents of the ‘inf’ folder. Not as interesting as the event viewer, but there are still a lot of scary looking files in there – if you didn’t know that this is a standard Windows folder.
The caller attempts to connect you to the ‘ammyy.com’ remote access service. I don’t know if this site is connected to the scammer organisation; it’s probably not. (earlier versions of the scam used the ‘logmein123.com’ domain.)
The caller now offers some contact details so you can verify who they are. Feel free to check yourself:
Phone Number – (03) 9016 8698
Physical Address – 76 Albert Road, South Yarra
More comments about the call inline.
I’m not normally this mean to telemarketers, who are usually genuine people offering a genuine service. In this case, I’m angry with callers who use simple technical tricks to try to fool people into handing over the keys to their computers. I’m offended they tried, and worried they’re succeeding with other less-computer-savvy people. I don’t think it’s likely that these people believe they are offering a real service that actually helps, otherwise they would do some basic technical training which would expose their script as a simple sham.
Anyway – in Part One, the caller walks me through my file system and attempts to connect to my computer. (Warning – I do install software on their say-so, but only with the system on high alert; I don’t recommend taking this risk unless you know the full impact of what you are doing.) Favourite part – where the technician attempts to show me ‘INF – Internet Notorious Files’.
in Part Two, the caller tries to establish more credibility. And fails.
Have you received any of these calls before? Interested in your comments; especially if there are other versions out there.
UPDATE: Jun 13
Followup time – as has been pointed out by a few folk – the contact details I was supplied are bogus: the physical address doesn’t exist (the only Albert Road is in South Melbourne, with a BP Service Station where 76 should be) and the phone number is answered by a foreign-accented person with no knowledge of the service that was touted yesterday. I hope they call back so I can note those details correctly next time.
(Note: this post was written in response to the lack of government involvement in Social Media support of the event explained in this post. I actually believe the opposite, but was interested to explore the alternative side of the argument as a writing exercise. I am not associated with, nor represent the views of, any government department.)
1. Social Media Is, Essentially, Gossip
Image via Wikipedia
Social Media is marketed as a meeting place for place for friends to discuss opinions and day-to-day activities. It is not moderated or vetted in any way, and mis/disinformation carries as much truck as the gospel truth.
We prefer that official channels remain separate from a crowd-sourced approach, and not a participant in it. We value the ability to be able to ‘cut through’ the noise with predictable, measured responses that people can anticipate, rely upon, and trust. By operating a twitter or facebook account we run the risk of becoming part of the noise, and of needing to compete for attention against other internet users, in some cases, the very people we are trying to advise.
It is far better to remain silent when the risk of inaccurate information may cost a life. It is better to have people actively seeking information from official sources (via phone or by switching on a radio) than to allow them to put their trust in what appears to be an official source. It is difficult to differentiate between official and unofficial sources (and credible and incredible stories) in the social media sphere, especially if people decide to impersonate officials or organisations via unverified accounts.
For example, during the recent Queensland floods, a rumour was spread via social media that an important dam had developed a crack and was about to burst, and that an evacuation centre sheltering 500 people had lost a roof. People were needlessly panicked, and resources had to be devoted to dispelling myths, rather than delivering useful, true, verified information.
2. Social Media Has No Filter
We prefer to issue alerts directly, via a website we directly control, or through media outlets we trust to handle our information with accuracy and sensitivity. Credibility and trust are critical commodities when people are being asked to make critical decisions quickly. Information made available through official governmnent sites goes though a number of levels of review – some may see that as bureaucracy – others may see it as appropriate governance.
Government departments and news organisations have reputations to maintain and are held accountable for the information they serve – they will not jump at shadows as willingly as some self-elected social media mavens may choose do, even with the best on intentions. It is better to remain a separation between a social approach and an official approach.
Social media also depends on unreliable infrastructure. As robust as social media services are, they are not infallible, and have not been built with mission-critical infrastructure. A twitter ‘fail-whale’ should not become a reason that lives are lost.
3. Social Media Reaches Very Few Important People
The people most in need of emergency assistance are those least likely to own or operate smartphones, twitter and facebook accounts. It is better to focus efforts on communication methods that will reach everyone – including those with smartphones and twitter accounts.
Social media does not have close-to-100% population coverage, as traditional media does. Despite figures touting a broad adoption of social media, in times of trouble, people revert to simpler, more direct communication channels, like telephone and radio. SMS is not a guaranteed delivery mechanism for vital information, Twitter and Facebook even less so.
Social Media in Crisis Situations is a Dumb Idea
Government departments are experts in crisis management – and know that it is better to confront a challenging emergency with ruthless economy and certainty. More information is not better information, and is more likely to do harm than benefit. Social media is a useful tool, but it is not the first one we reach for in crisis situations.
BONWAG 