VanguardLH wrote:
> Rhonda Lea Kirk Fries wrote:
>
>> VanguardLH wrote:
>>> Li'l Abner wrote:
>>>
>>>> There's lots of links on here. Any of them I hover over shows a
>>>> link starting with "https://email0.paypal.com/servlet/cc6....."
>>>> It sure looks like phishing to me. If I just log into PayPal the
>>>> normal way, I don't see anything about "enhanced account statement"
>>>> Is it real or do I forward it to spoof@paypal.com?
>>>>
>>>> From: "PayPal" <paypal@info.paypal.com>
>>>> Reply-To: "PayPal" <reply1@info.paypal.com>
>>>> Subject: My Name, your enhanced account statement is here
>>>> X-cid: pplna.4510.2
>>>> X-sgxh1: L7HP7LgxuLOgtplLQJhu
>>>> To: ME
>>>> X-valueof-OFFERID: 43929
>>>> X-valueof-CAMPAIGNID: 8417
>>>> X-valueof-TREATMENTCODE: 000814556
>>>> X-valueof-EMAILCATEGORY: NON
>>>> X-valueof-HASHID: 43A21497869790451
>>>> Message-ID: <0.0.E4.807.1CBFEF052E486EE.0@om-paypal-na.rsys4.com>
>>>> X-MDRcpt-To: me@myfinaldomain.com
>>>> X-Rcpt-To: me@myfinaldomain.com
>>>> X-MDRemoteIP: 167.142.228.191
>>>> X-Return-Path: paypal@info.paypal.com
>>>> X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: (valid)
>>>> X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on MOXIE
>>>> X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.5 required=8.0
>>>> tests=BAYES_00,HTML_90_100,
>>>> HTML_MESSAGE,HTML_TAG_EXIST_TBODY,UPPERCASE_25_50, USER_IN_WHITELIST
>>>> autolearn=no version=3.0.2
>>>> X-Spam-Level:
>>>> X-Spam-Processed: Moxie, Tue, 19 Apr 2011 19:17:34 -0500
>>>>
>>>> Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 17:17:24 -0700
>>>> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----alt_border_1"
>>>>
>>>> Review your enhanced PayPal account statement today.
>>>> View mobile | View online
>>>> Recover your password | Get help | Your account
>>>> Hello MY NAME,
>>>> Exciting news! You now have an enhanced way to view and quickly
>>>> keep track of your account activity.
>>>> See your enhanced Account Statement
>>>> You can access your statement any time by clicking Statements from
>>>> your Account Overview. Want to see it now? Go
>>>> Accept electronic communications from us
>>>> To continue to receive information about your account
>>>> electronically* including your account statements*you must accept
>>>> our Electronic Communications Delivery Policy. It only takes a few
>>>> clicks: . Log in to PayPal
>>>> . Click the Electronic Communications Delivery Policy link and
>>>> read the policy
>>>> . Click the checkbox to accept the policy
>>>> . Click Agree and Continue
>>>> For additional information on reporting unauthorized transactions
>>>> or other errors, follow the steps listed in section 12 of the
>>>> PayPal User Agreement: Resolution Procedures for Unauthorized
>>>> Transactions and Other Errors
>>>> İ 2011 PayPal Inc. All rights reserved. PayPal is located at 2211
>>>> N. First St., San Jose, CA 95131.
>>>
>>> Since you didn't bother to show all the headers, including the
>>> Received headers, how would anyone else know from where you got the
>>> e-mail? Show *ALL* the headers in the original e-mail except
>>> munge/star out your username (not the domain since that's public
>>> info, anyway).
>>>
>>> Since you decided to show just the plain text version and not the
>>> HTML code, just how would we know what the URLs really pointed at?
>>> Show *ALL* the HTML code, not what you see or the rendered version
>>> of it.
>>>
>>> What you showed above was an incomplete exhibit.
>>
>> If you don't have anything relevant to contribute, why do you post?
>
> Yeah, I see how detailed you were in showing how to trace the delivery
> of an e-mail without the appropriate headers in the exhibit.

As if headers cannot be forged.

In other words, the headers are useless to the purpose of determining the
legitimacy of the email.

> Now look
> at my reply after the OP did provide the headers. It was a hell of a
> lot more informative than your other reply (versus your worthless
> response here).

I have firsthand proof that the email is legitmate--I used the links
therein, and I agreed to the requested changes for the enhanced billing
statement. No problem.

> If you don't have anything relevant to contribute, why do you post?

Apparently your interpretation of "relevance" favors your blathering, not
anything that might be useful.

> See, your inane statement applies to you, too. Pretty soon if you
> keep this up, you'll be the female equivalent of richard (another
> well-known ignorant responder).

No one can outdo you for ignorance.