Thread

MALICE ALERT

Amelie, 19 Oct 2005 15:11:23

I have just received a email with what appears to be a malicious mailing of
a picture of a child being sexually abused. It does not appear in the text
of the letter which concerns the Harry Potter childrens' book series, but
showed up on a preview scan.

----- Original Message -----

"Jeannie" , 19 Oct 2005 15:11:23

To:
Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 10:02 AM

SM Pride, 19 Oct 2005 22:25:20

We received this mail last Saturday from Phillip - subject Re: The images are actually imbedded and open in the main body of the mail - not even an attachment to choose to open or not.

We reported it to the local police and asked what we needed to do. They didn't even take our details, just told us to forward the mail to the abuse addie at our ISP and they would deal with it from there. We haven't had any acknowledgement from the ISP.

Seems suspiciously odd to get this kind of mail right in the middle of a government consultation that lumps us in with child pornography though.

Jan

-----Original Message-----

Amelie [mailto:Amelie@psychosynthesis.fsnet.co.uk], 19 Oct 2005 22:25:20

Sent: 19 October 2005 15:11

I have just received a email with what appears to be a malicious mailing of
a picture of a child being sexually abused. It does not appear in the text
of the letter which concerns the Harry Potter childrens' book series, but
showed up on a preview scan.

----- Original Message -----

"Jeannie" , 19 Oct 2005 22:25:20

To:
Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 10:02 AM

Manniq, 20 Oct 2005 00:13:38

I am talking to a couple of individuals about this, with a view to putting together some notes to be kept in our archive, telling people a) how to minimise risks of this sort of thing and b) what to do if subjected to it.

However, if anyone on board is enough of an expert to put together such a note, please stick your hand up now!

Regards,

M

Author wrote:
> We received this mail last Saturday from Phillip - subject Re: The images are actually imbedded and open in the main body of the mail - not even an attachment to choose to open or not.
> We reported it to the local police and asked what we needed to do. They didn't even take our details, just told us to forward the mail to the abuse addie at our ISP and they would deal with it from there. We haven't had any acknowledgement from the ISP.
> Seems suspiciously odd to get this kind of mail right in the middle of a government consultation that lumps us in with child pornography though.
> Jan
> -----Original Message-----

: Amelie [mailto:Amelie@psychosynthesis.fsnet.co.uk], 20 Oct 2005 00:13:38

> Sent: 19 October 2005 15:11
> Subject: [backlash] MALICE ALERT
> I have just received a email with what appears to be a malicious mailing of
> a picture of a child being sexually abused. It does not appear in the text
> of the letter which concerns the Harry Potter childrens' book series, but
> showed up on a preview scan.
> ----- Original Message -----

: "Jeannie" , 20 Oct 2005 00:13:38

> To:
> Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 10:02 AM
> Subject: Re:
> "There's nothing quite like Harry Potter in publishing," Bookseller magazine
> children's book expert Caroline Horn told Reuters.
> What is known is that Rowling has said the books would get progressively
> darker as Harry -- now entering his sixth year at the Hogwarts School of
> Witchcraft and Wizardry -- gets older and closer to his ultimate battle with
> Lord Voldemort, the series' personification of evil.
> --
> If you want to share pictures, use the calendar, or start a vote
> visit http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/Backlash
> To leave the Group, email: Backlash-unsubscribe@smartgroups.com
> Report abuse http://www.smartgroups.com/text/abusereport.cfm?gid%3D3271426&mid%3D1854

zak, 20 Oct 2005 01:05:39

THis may just be a practical joke. There is a lot of slash fiction about
the Harry Potter
series, some of which is a bit, um, startling if you're not used to it.
Do you know the sender of the email? could this be a random virus?

zjk

Original Message:
-----------------

Amelie Amelie@psychosynthesis.fsnet.co.uk, 20 Oct 2005 01:05:39

"Jeannie" , Wed, 19 Oct 2005 15:10:57 +0100

To:
Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 10:02 AM

adrian, 20 Oct 2005 06:54:13

At 22:06 19/10/2005 +0100, you wrote:
>
>We received this mail last Saturday from Phillip - subject Re: The images
are actually imbedded and open in the main body of the mail - not even an
attachment to choose to open or not.

Do either of you still have the mail? I'm not an expert but there are
headers that can give some evidence of where it originated. Most mail
clients give the option of displaying all headers. I'd much prefer not to
have the entire mail forwarded to me, but if you or any others who have had
this mail can contact me we can try to investigate.

John Thow, 20 Oct 2005 09:00:23

zak@missdemeanour.idps.co.uk wrote:
> THis may just be a practical joke. There is a lot of slash fiction about
> the Harry Potter
> series, some of which is a bit, um, startling if you're not used to it.
> Do you know the sender of the email? could this be a random virus?
>
> zjk
I also received 2 copies of the email - There was an article on it here:

"Graphic photographs of the rape of a young girl were embedded in a
spammed e-mail sent across Canada this weekend -- just the latest in an
increasingly aggressive campaign by online marketers of child porn.

At least 10 complaints about the unsolicited e-mail were called in over
the weekend to Cybertip.ca, a national reporting centre based in Winnipeg."
http://www.torontosun.com/News/Canada/2005/10/17/1265648-sun.html

Amelie, 20 Oct 2005 10:08:27

----- Original Message -----

"John Thow" , 20 Oct 2005 10:08:27

To:
Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2005 9:00 AM

> zak@missdemeanour.idps.co.uk wrote:
>> THis may just be a practical joke. There is a lot of slash fiction about
>> the Harry Potter
>> series, some of which is a bit, um, startling if you're not used to it.
>> Do you know the sender of the email? could this be a random virus?
>>
>> zjk
> I also received 2 copies of the email - There was an article on it here:
>
> "Graphic photographs of the rape of a young girl were embedded in a
> spammed e-mail sent across Canada this weekend -- just the latest in an
> increasingly aggressive campaign by online marketers of child porn.
>
> At least 10 complaints about the unsolicited e-mail were called in over
> the weekend to Cybertip.ca, a national reporting centre based in
> Winnipeg."
> http://www.torontosun.com/News/Canada/2005/10/17/1265648-sun.html
>
>
>
>
> --
> If you want to share pictures, use the calendar, or start a vote
> visit http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/Backlash
>
> To leave the Group, email: Backlash-unsubscribe@smartgroups.com
>
> Report abuse
> http://www.smartgroups.com/text/abusereport.cfm?gid%3D3271426&mid%3D1904
>

Amelie, 20 Oct 2005 10:08:58

thanks - and no - the sender was unknown and daemon could not send a reply.
I reported it to the police anyway and got a case number to keep me squeaky
clean! Who knows, at some point we may be able to use it as a hook for a
news item.

could not see how this could be to the advantage of any porn reseller, but
silver pointed out that if these images are spammed to every computer, the
watchdogs will be snowed under and the police can hardly prosecute
everybody. Possibly another good point to make against the practicality of
the bill - that it may well spark off similar aggressive, offensive ways to
make it unworkable, Amelie

----- Original Message -----

"John Thow" , 20 Oct 2005 10:08:58

Amelie, 20 Oct 2005 10:08:58

"John Thow" , 20 Oct 2005 10:08:58

Chris, 20 Oct 2005 10:39:41

It occurs that this could be a cynical, but rather clever, ploy by child
pornographers to circumvent the law. If, as reported in the Toronto Sun
article, police would *never* prosecute someone who accidentally viewed an
image (which, of course, is logged in a PC the same as any that a person had
intentionally viewed), then it could provide a "reasonable doubt" defence
for a person who has intentionally viewed child porn.

This sort of incident would make policing extremely difficult, and ought to
give more focus (as has been mentioned before) to the government on dealing
with the explosion of spam email rather than intruding on people's
consensual private lives.

----Original Message Follows----

John Thow , 20 Oct 2005 10:39:41

zak@missdemeanour.idps.co.uk wrote:
>THis may just be a practical joke. There is a lot of slash fiction about
>the Harry Potter
>series, some of which is a bit, um, startling if you're not used to it.
>Do you know the sender of the email? could this be a random virus?
>
>zjk
I also received 2 copies of the email - There was an article on it here:

"Graphic photographs of the rape of a young girl were embedded in a
spammed e-mail sent across Canada this weekend -- just the latest in an
increasingly aggressive campaign by online marketers of child porn.

At least 10 complaints about the unsolicited e-mail were called in over
the weekend to Cybertip.ca, a national reporting centre based in Winnipeg."
http://www.torontosun.com/News/Canada/2005/10/17/1265648-sun.html

--
If you want to share pictures, use the calendar, or start a vote
visit http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/Backlash

To leave the Group, email: Backlash-unsubscribe@smartgroups.com

Report abuse
http://www.smartgroups.com/text/abusereport.cfm?gid%3D3271426&mid%3D1904

Amelie, 20 Oct 2005 10:55:52

Thanks, Adrian.

this is the information I have kept - I CALLED DATA PROTECTION HELPLINE
3.20p.m. 19TH OCT, 2005 TO REPORT A MALICIOUS EMAIL WITH NO TEXT BUT
EMBEDDED PICS OF CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE:

----- Original Message -----

"Jeannie" anxc@antronomia.com, 20 Oct 2005 10:55:52

>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 10:02 AM

> At 22:06 19/10/2005 +0100, you wrote:
>>
>>We received this mail last Saturday from Phillip - subject Re: The images
> are actually imbedded and open in the main body of the mail - not even an
> attachment to choose to open or not.
>
> Do either of you still have the mail? I'm not an expert but there are
> headers that can give some evidence of where it originated. Most mail
> clients give the option of displaying all headers. I'd much prefer not to
> have the entire mail forwarded to me, but if you or any others who have
> had
> this mail can contact me we can try to investigate.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> If you want to share pictures, use the calendar, or start a vote
> visit http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/Backlash
>
> To leave the Group, email: Backlash-unsubscribe@smartgroups.com
>
> Report abuse
> http://www.smartgroups.com/text/abusereport.cfm?gid%3D3271426&mid%3D1902
>

Lothario, 20 Oct 2005 11:07:20

Note that this email with the subject, "Re:" has already been reported
to the IWF:

http://www.iwf.org.uk/reporting.htm

You can check the list on that page to see if the mail has already
been reported to them. If it isn't listed, it might be a new spam mail
(in which case report to them) or it might be sent specifically to you
(do likewise).

There are many steps you can take to protect yourself from this kind
of thing. One approach (by no means the only one) is to use a
web-based mail system. The advantage of this is that common spam
emails should be automatically filtered to a separate folder (Bulk
Mail/Spam) so most of the time you'll never actually see them in your
Inbox. Likewise, there is no prospect of images contained within the
mail being opened on your computer.

Images embedded within HTML-format emails

Most modern email programs do not automatically show images embedded
within HTML mails except where those mails come from senders known to
you and/or you have specified that you want to view those images.

The main reason for this is to protect you from "web bugs".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_bugs

It also prevents you from viewing potentially offensive images without
having the option of stopping them from being displayed in the email
preview window.

This works by default when using:

MS Outlook Express with Windows XP Service Pack 2:

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/843018

If you don't have SP2, this page describes how you can obtain and install it:

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/sp2/default.mspx

Mozilla Thunderbird is a good, free alternative to Outlook Express:
http://www.mozilla.org/products/thunderbird/

... and most popular web-based mail services, though some manage it
better than others. Googlemail does it (and everything else)
particularly well. You need an invitation to join Googlemail - email
me directly if you want one. (No, I don't work for them.)

Things not to do with potentially illegal mail:

- Forward it to anyone that does not have specific official
responsibility for dealing with such things and without their express
prior permission. You will be committing an offence for doing so.

- Retain it any longer than is necessary to ensure that it is reported
to the correct people.

Running Linux

(You can skip the rest of this email if Windows/MacOS does everything
you'd ever want it to and you're perfectly happy with both the
performance and the price.)

A more extreme approach to computer security is to run Linux. I'm not
going to advocate this as a painless or totally like-for-like
substitute for Windows (or MacOS), but usability and usefulness is
improving rapidly and for many people, now is the time to at least
explore what's going on in the Linux world.

People will disagree about whether Linux is inherently more secure
than Windows. What is undeniable is that most viruses, trojans etc.
are written for Windows and simply do not work on Linux. This is not
necessarily due to any virtue of Linux other than it is a minority
system and people write malicious software to exploit common systems,
not uncommon ones. Nonetheless, it's a big advantage for people who
happen to be running Linux.

Most Linux suppliers ("distributions") now offer a "Live CD" that
allows you to try their system without having to install it on your
computer first. I'd recommend having a look at the Live CD from the
Ubuntu system:

http://releases.ubuntu.com/5.10/

You'll probably want to download "PC (Intel x86) live CD" if you're
running a standard PC. You will then need to burn this to a blank CD
as an "ISO image" - ask someone if you don't know how to do this
because it's a different process to the way you usually write data to
a CD. Once you have your live CD burned, boot from it and try it out.

Common Linux myths that are (now) untrue:

1. "You can't run Microsoft Office on it".

You can, now, with Crossover Office.

http://www.codeweavers.com/products/crossover/

If you don't specifically need to use Microsoft Office, you can run
OpenOffice.org which comes free with most Linux systems. (You can also
run it on a PC under Windows and on the Mac, too.)

www.openoffice.org

2. "It's hard to install it."

If you've ever installed Windows, you won't have a problem installing
Ubuntu. If you've never installed Windows, you could give it a try or
ask a Windows-competent person to help.

3. "It's hard to install or upgrade software."

No longer. Ubuntu's "Synaptic package manager" makes it easier to
install and upgrade software than it is on Windows. You can work with
individual programs much like Add/Remove Programs in the Windows
control panel (install/upgrade/remove) or upgrade your entire
collection of software to the latest version in one go. This works
much like Windows Update, except that the updates apply to _all_ the
software on your computer, not just the components that are part of
the operating system (Windows/Linux) itself.

With Ubuntu you can upgrade your entire system to the latest version
of Linux with a couple of clicks - and without even restarting the
computer.

Did I mention that it's entirely free? You can download a copy and
burn it for yourself, legally receive or give a copy to/from a friend,
and Ubuntu will actually post you a CD/DVD copy if you ask for one
_without even charging you postage_.

https://shipit.ubuntu.com/

I'm not an expert on this, and there will be various reasons why Linux
won't suit many people right now. But for many others it will. If
you've had a look in the past and not liked it, I'm pleased to report
that things have improved dramatically even in the last six months.
It's worth having another look and keeping an eye on how it develops.

--
Lothario.

"I disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death my right
to stop you saying it." - Charles Clarke (attributed)

Amelie, 20 Oct 2005 11:19:00

a weird one, Lothario,

I have spam filters which regularly put newsgroup mailings into my delete
file although they are specifically excluded, and I have xp service pack 2,
which usually prevents graphics unless I click to download them, but this
picture opened directly into my email viewer none-the -less. The police
have asked me to save the email and image until they contact me again.
Amelie

----- Original Message -----

"Lothario" , 20 Oct 2005 11:19:00

To:
Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2005 10:56 AM

Note that this email with the subject, "Re:" has already been reported
to the IWF:

http://www.iwf.org.uk/reporting.htm

You can check the list on that page to see if the mail has already
been reported to them. If it isn't listed, it might be a new spam mail
(in which case report to them) or it might be sent specifically to you
(do likewise).

There are many steps you can take to protect yourself from this kind
of thing. One approach (by no means the only one) is to use a
web-based mail system. The advantage of this is that common spam
emails should be automatically filtered to a separate folder (Bulk
Mail/Spam) so most of the time you'll never actually see them in your
Inbox. Likewise, there is no prospect of images contained within the
mail being opened on your computer.

Images embedded within HTML-format emails

Most modern email programs do not automatically show images embedded
within HTML mails except where those mails come from senders known to
you and/or you have specified that you want to view those images.

The main reason for this is to protect you from "web bugs".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_bugs

It also prevents you from viewing potentially offensive images without
having the option of stopping them from being displayed in the email
preview window.

This works by default when using:

MS Outlook Express with Windows XP Service Pack 2:

http://support.microsoft.com/kb/843018

If you don't have SP2, this page describes how you can obtain and install
it:

http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/sp2/default.mspx

Mozilla Thunderbird is a good, free alternative to Outlook Express:
http://www.mozilla.org/products/thunderbird/

... and most popular web-based mail services, though some manage it
better than others. Googlemail does it (and everything else)
particularly well. You need an invitation to join Googlemail - email
me directly if you want one. (No, I don't work for them.)

Things not to do with potentially illegal mail:

- Forward it to anyone that does not have specific official
responsibility for dealing with such things and without their express
prior permission. You will be committing an offence for doing so.

- Retain it any longer than is necessary to ensure that it is reported
to the correct people.

Running Linux

(You can skip the rest of this email if Windows/MacOS does everything
you'd ever want it to and you're perfectly happy with both the
performance and the price.)

A more extreme approach to computer security is to run Linux. I'm not
going to advocate this as a painless or totally like-for-like
substitute for Windows (or MacOS), but usability and usefulness is
improving rapidly and for many people, now is the time to at least
explore what's going on in the Linux world.

People will disagree about whether Linux is inherently more secure
than Windows. What is undeniable is that most viruses, trojans etc.
are written for Windows and simply do not work on Linux. This is not
necessarily due to any virtue of Linux other than it is a minority
system and people write malicious software to exploit common systems,
not uncommon ones. Nonetheless, it's a big advantage for people who
happen to be running Linux.

Most Linux suppliers ("distributions") now offer a "Live CD" that
allows you to try their system without having to install it on your
computer first. I'd recommend having a look at the Live CD from the
Ubuntu system:

http://releases.ubuntu.com/5.10/

You'll probably want to download "PC (Intel x86) live CD" if you're
running a standard PC. You will then need to burn this to a blank CD
as an "ISO image" - ask someone if you don't know how to do this
because it's a different process to the way you usually write data to
a CD. Once you have your live CD burned, boot from it and try it out.

Common Linux myths that are (now) untrue:

1. "You can't run Microsoft Office on it".

You can, now, with Crossover Office.

http://www.codeweavers.com/products/crossover/

If you don't specifically need to use Microsoft Office, you can run
OpenOffice.org which comes free with most Linux systems. (You can also
run it on a PC under Windows and on the Mac, too.)

www.openoffice.org

2. "It's hard to install it."

If you've ever installed Windows, you won't have a problem installing
Ubuntu. If you've never installed Windows, you could give it a try or
ask a Windows-competent person to help.

3. "It's hard to install or upgrade software."

No longer. Ubuntu's "Synaptic package manager" makes it easier to
install and upgrade software than it is on Windows. You can work with
individual programs much like Add/Remove Programs in the Windows
control panel (install/upgrade/remove) or upgrade your entire
collection of software to the latest version in one go. This works
much like Windows Update, except that the updates apply to _all_ the
software on your computer, not just the components that are part of
the operating system (Windows/Linux) itself.

With Ubuntu you can upgrade your entire system to the latest version
of Linux with a couple of clicks - and without even restarting the
computer.

Did I mention that it's entirely free? You can download a copy and
burn it for yourself, legally receive or give a copy to/from a friend,
and Ubuntu will actually post you a CD/DVD copy if you ask for one
_without even charging you postage_.

https://shipit.ubuntu.com/

I'm not an expert on this, and there will be various reasons why Linux
won't suit many people right now. But for many others it will. If
you've had a look in the past and not liked it, I'm pleased to report
that things have improved dramatically even in the last six months.
It's worth having another look and keeping an eye on how it develops.

--
Lothario.

"I disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death my right
to stop you saying it." - Charles Clarke (attributed)

--
If you want to share pictures, use the calendar, or start a vote
visit http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/Backlash

To leave the Group, email: Backlash-unsubscribe@smartgroups.com

Report abuse
http://www.smartgroups.com/text/abusereport.cfm?gid%3D3271426&mid%3D1912

Amelie, 20 Oct 2005 11:42:12

as silver says, this implies that the enforcers are already snowed under
with complaints and have been instructed to ignore them. Certainly the
police were reluctant to record my complaint or give me a case number or
even the contact address for the watchdogs . I had to do my gentle but
effective line of insistence.

But if they cannot keep up with their current remit, how can they hope to
police an extended one?
it will be, like all the other things our social network is supposed to
provide, a bit of a lottery.... and the key will be to record as few
complaints as possible and deal with the simplest first.

----- Original Message -----

"The Team" , 20 Oct 2005 11:42:12

To:
Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 10:06 PM

We received this mail last Saturday from Phillip - subject Re: The images
are actually imbedded and open in the main body of the mail - not even an
attachment to choose to open or not.

We reported it to the local police and asked what we needed to do. They
didn't even take our details, just told us to forward the mail to the abuse
addie at our ISP and they would deal with it from there. We haven't had any
acknowledgement from the ISP.

Seems suspiciously odd to get this kind of mail right in the middle of a
government consultation that lumps us in with child pornography though.

Jan

-----Original Message-----

Amelie [mailto:Amelie@psychosynthesis.fsnet.co.uk], 20 Oct 2005 11:42:12

"Jeannie" , 20 Oct 2005 11:42:12

To:
Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2005 10:02 AM

zak, 20 Oct 2005 14:50:12

Original Message:
-----------------

John Thow johnthow@petml.com, 20 Oct 2005 14:50:12

zak, 20 Oct 2005 14:56:07

Original Message:
-----------------

John Thow johnthow@petml.com, 20 Oct 2005 14:56:07

I also received 2 copies of the email - There was an article on it here:

"Graphic photographs of the rape of a young girl were embedded in a
spammed e-mail sent across Canada this weekend -- just the latest in an
increasingly aggressive campaign by online marketers of child porn.

At least 10 complaints about the unsolicited e-mail were called in over
the weekend to Cybertip.ca, a national reporting centre based in Winnipeg."
http://www.torontosun.com/News/Canada/2005/10/17/1265648-sun.html

Now, call me paranoid, but didn't the FIB formerly bombard people with
adverts for kiddie
porn and then nick them when they responded...

The thing is, because child porn is the worst-demon-in-the-world, people
are ready to
beleive anything of the kiddie-porn monster - including this kind of
STUPIDITY. Why on
earth would a commercial operation send out adverts to random people for a
product that is
heavily proscribed, illegal, despised and hated pretty much all round the
world?

THis does sound far more like malice than marketing.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .

Lothario, 20 Oct 2005 15:30:44

> Why on
> earth would a commercial operation send out adverts to random people for a
> product that is
> heavily proscribed, illegal, despised and hated pretty much all round the
> world?
>
> THis does sound far more like malice than marketing.

They'd do it for the same reason that all spammers send spam for.
Because it makes money. You appropriate others' computing resources to
run a massive advertising campaign for near-zero cost, and profit from
the sales generated by an infinitesimally low percentage response.
It's a numbers game run on a huge scale.

The fact of the matter is that one in a thousand or one in ten
thousand will respond to this campaign and part with their money. This
material may be legal or its illegality may not be enforced in that
place. The customer may be happy to take that risk. Either way, the
spammers make money for little cost and little risk to themselves.

--
Lothario.

"I disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death my right
to stop you saying it." - Charles Clarke (attributed)

zak, 20 Oct 2005 17:35:11

Original Message:
-----------------

Lothario lothario.uk@gmail.com, 20 Oct 2005 17:35:11

They'd do it for the same reason that all spammers send spam for.
Because it makes money. You appropriate others' computing resources to
run a massive advertising campaign for near-zero cost, and profit from
the sales generated by an infinitesimally low percentage response.
It's a numbers game run on a huge scale.

The fact of the matter is that one in a thousand or one in ten
thousand will respond to this campaign and part with their money. This
material may be legal or its illegality may not be enforced in that
place. The customer may be happy to take that risk. Either way, the
spammers make money for little cost and little risk to themselves.

--
Lothario.

This might be the case with most smut, but isn't the risk (with child porn)
of people
reporting you and trying to shut you down a bit too high?

zj

--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .

Lothario, 20 Oct 2005 17:51:56

> This might be the case with most smut, but isn't the risk (with child porn)
> of people
> reporting you and trying to shut you down a bit too high?
>
> zj

It depends where it's coming from. In many countries, spammers are
virtually untouchable for a variety of reasons.

That said, most spam AFAIK comes from the USA.

--
Lothario.

"I disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death my right
to stop you saying it." - Charles Clarke (attributed)

Amelie, 20 Oct 2005 18:01:36

CANNOT SEE THAT THIS APPLIES IN THIS CASE AS THERE IS NO RETURN ADDRESS.
POLICE ARE COMING TO ME ANY MINUTE TO TAKE DETAILS AND COPIES OF THE MAIL
FOR THEIR RECORDS. WILL KEEP YOU POSTED. AMELIE

, 20 Oct 2005 18:01:36

To:
Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2005 5:34 PM

Original Message:
-----------------

Lothario lothario.uk@gmail.com, 20 Oct 2005 18:01:36

Manniq, 20 Oct 2005 20:04:40

Hmmm. I fail to see quite how this constitutes 'marketing'. Presumably, if you are into this sort of business, the audience is small and select - and you don't exactly need to alert all and sundry to who you are and where you are located.

Not just a quibble: if you are 'marketing', you presumably need to provide some sort of follow-up address to contact. Spamming such a thing would be remarkably stupid. Like an invitation to the local plod to come on and have a go.

ANy evidence of where it originated? Strikes me that it is just a slikely that this comes from the anti-porn brigade, and is designed to ratchet up the debate on the subject.

Regards,

M

Author wrote:
> zak@missdemeanour.idps.co.uk wrote:
> > THis may just be a practical joke. There is a lot of slash fiction about
> > the Harry Potter
> > series, some of which is a bit, um, startling if you're not used to it.
> > Do you know the sender of the email? could this be a random virus?
> >
> > zjk
> I also received 2 copies of the email - There was an article on it here:
> "Graphic photographs of the rape of a young girl were embedded in a
> spammed e-mail sent across Canada this weekend -- just the latest in an
> increasingly aggressive campaign by online marketers of child porn.
> At least 10 complaints about the unsolicited e-mail were called in over
> the weekend to Cybertip.ca, a national reporting centre based in Winnipeg."
> http://www.torontosun.com/News/Canada/2005/10/17/1265648-sun.html

Amelie, 20 Oct 2005 20:18:28

tried to trace it back but managed only : host
antronomia-com.mr.outblaze.com[64.62.181.91]
said:
550 : User unknown (in reply to RCPT TO command)"

that is the end of my competence -that 11 number digit is presumably their
IP address - but that is not necessarily static. Anyone care to try?

----- Original Message -----

, 20 Oct 2005 20:18:28

To:
Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2005 8:04 PM

> Hmmm. I fail to see quite how this constitutes 'marketing'. Presumably,
> if you are into this sort of business, the audience is small and select -
> and you don't exactly need to alert all and sundry to who you are and
> where you are located.
>
> Not just a quibble: if you are 'marketing', you presumably need to provide
> some sort of follow-up address to contact. Spamming such a thing would be
> remarkably stupid. Like an invitation to the local plod to come on and
> have a go.
>
> ANy evidence of where it originated? Strikes me that it is just a slikely
> that this comes from the anti-porn brigade, and is designed to ratchet up
> the debate on the subject.
>
> Regards,
>
> M
>
> Author wrote:
>> zak@missdemeanour.idps.co.uk wrote:
>> > THis may just be a practical joke. There is a lot of slash fiction
>> > about
>> > the Harry Potter
>> > series, some of which is a bit, um, startling if you're not used to it.
>> > Do you know the sender of the email? could this be a random virus?
>> >
>> > zjk
>> I also received 2 copies of the email - There was an article on it here:
>> "Graphic photographs of the rape of a young girl were embedded in a
>> spammed e-mail sent across Canada this weekend -- just the latest in an
>> increasingly aggressive campaign by online marketers of child porn.
>> At least 10 complaints about the unsolicited e-mail were called in over
>> the weekend to Cybertip.ca, a national reporting centre based in
>> Winnipeg."
>> http://www.torontosun.com/News/Canada/2005/10/17/1265648-sun.html
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> If you want to share pictures, use the calendar, or start a vote
> visit http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/Backlash
>
> To leave the Group, email: Backlash-unsubscribe@smartgroups.com
>
> Report abuse
> http://www.smartgroups.com/text/abusereport.cfm?gid%3D3271426&mid%3D1950
>

Amelie, 20 Oct 2005 20:28:11

I have now traced the service provider to HONG CONG and complained to them.
Amelie
----- Original Message -----

, 20 Oct 2005 20:28:11

fobix, 20 Oct 2005 20:39:50

On 20/10/05, Amelie wrote:
> I have now traced the service provider to HONG CONG and complained to them.
> Amelie

I would have thought that it's very probable that any Hong Kong origin
would have been hacked/exploited, but good luck.

adrian, 20 Oct 2005 20:44:05

Thanks for your help Amelie

What I really need are the headers that aren't normally displayed. In
particular those that start 'Received: from'. Most mail clients allow them
to be shown, maybe with an option like Show All Headers.

However from other people's replies, it seems likely that these mails are
the result of an infected PC (e.g. a PC gets a trojan which makes it spew
these mails out to hundreds of recipients, but the mails themselves are
probably not infectious). If they were there would be virus reports
quoting it.

And if this is the case you can probably ignore it.

adrian, 20 Oct 2005 22:31:41

At 20:17 20/10/2005 +0100, you wrote:
>tried to trace it back but managed only : host
>antronomia-com.mr.outblaze.com[64.62.181.91]
>said:
> 550 : User unknown (in reply to RCPT TO command)"
>
>that is the end of my competence -that 11 number digit is presumably their
>IP address - but that is not necessarily static. Anyone care to try?
The trouble is that the From address may well not be the originator of the
mail. At best it's likely to be an innocently infected PC. And more
likely to be an invented or unrelated address added by the trojan. The
Received: From headers almost certainly contain the real IP address from
which the mail came from, but fake ones can be added to confuse matters.
And as I say, likely to be the IP address of an innocent PC.

As it seems likely to be spam from a trojan, this is unlikely to lead to
the originator so it's probably not worth pursuing. Heavy-duty
governmental type sleuthing, getting the headers of infected PC and tracing
back to source, might work but not something we can do. Thanks for your
help anyway.

Amelie, 20 Oct 2005 23:44:26

off topic for group, but cannot see it being a trojan as that would hijack
some-one elses address book, presumably someone known to me and not several
members of our group. Seems too focussed to be accidental. Amelie
----- Original Message -----

"Adrian" , 20 Oct 2005 23:44:26

To:
Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2005 10:33 PM

> At 20:17 20/10/2005 +0100, you wrote:
>>tried to trace it back but managed only : host
>>antronomia-com.mr.outblaze.com[64.62.181.91]
>>said:
>> 550 : User unknown (in reply to RCPT TO command)"
>>
>>that is the end of my competence -that 11 number digit is presumably
>>their
>>IP address - but that is not necessarily static. Anyone care to try?
> The trouble is that the From address may well not be the originator of the
> mail. At best it's likely to be an innocently infected PC. And more
> likely to be an invented or unrelated address added by the trojan. The
> Received: From headers almost certainly contain the real IP address from
> which the mail came from, but fake ones can be added to confuse matters.
> And as I say, likely to be the IP address of an innocent PC.
>
> As it seems likely to be spam from a trojan, this is unlikely to lead to
> the originator so it's probably not worth pursuing. Heavy-duty
> governmental type sleuthing, getting the headers of infected PC and
> tracing
> back to source, might work but not something we can do. Thanks for your
> help anyway.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> If you want to share pictures, use the calendar, or start a vote
> visit http://www.smartgroups.com/groups/Backlash
>
> To leave the Group, email: Backlash-unsubscribe@smartgroups.com
>
> Report abuse
> http://www.smartgroups.com/text/abusereport.cfm?gid%3D3271426&mid%3D1963
>

adrian, 20 Oct 2005 23:56:24

At 23:44 20/10/2005 +0100, you wrote:
>off topic for group, but cannot see it being a trojan as that would hijack
>some-one elses address book, presumably someone known to me and not several
>members of our group. Seems too focussed to be accidental. Amelie

No, others have had it with no obvious connection. You have a high profile
in this group but they don't, though might do elsewhere.

Also modern trojans don't mail your own address book. They mail the
address book of the person before, or a list sent to them. Sometimes using
the name of the address book's owner so that the recipient trusts them.

�No Name Set�, 21 Oct 2005 18:08:08

The police have a severe problem with lack of resources for
tackling all sorts of computer (and other high-tech) crime.

Most of them just don't have anything like the skills required,
and those that do are few, far between and have everything
headed in their direction.

That's why it's so hard for anything to be done about viruses,
hackers, phishing and the like - and things like fraud that
involves computer systems.

The general level of knowledge among the average bobbies as to
what is major, important, or even what you're talking about is
pretty low, and the chances that it is the most important stuff
that gets through is pretty small too. [I once tried to place
some info on what I believed to be a computer-related fraud with
Crimestoppers, and got told to go away and get myself a lawyer
and pay through the nose to sue them, if I thought it was so
important to me, and stop wasting police time. Needless to say,
I won't be reporting anything to Crimestoppers again!]

This is a well-known issue in the IT industry facing real
problems of hacking attacks and the like. The formation of the
High Tech Crime Unit was a start, but not enough resources to
tackle all the issues. I'm sure a search on the COmputer Weekly
archives would yield a rich haul of articles on the subject, if
anyone can gt in there (which I can't) and has the time.

Rosemary

"Amelie" writes:
as silver says, this implies that the enforcers are already snowed under
with complaints and have been instructed to ignore them. Certainly the
police were reluctant to record my complaint or give me a case number or
even the contact address for the watchdogs . I had to do my gentle but
effective line of insistence.

But if they cannot keep up with their current remit, how can they hope to
police an extended one?

--
Rosemary