On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 01:21:26 GMT, in <alt.privacy.spyware>, tony@well.com
wrote:
>
> I received three of these messages today, addressed to different
> "well.com" addresses, but none directly to me. They all referred to
> the same account. Should I worry?
>
> >From: "Internetters" <info@internetters.co.uk>
> >Reply-To: "Internetters" <info@internetters.co.uk>
> >To: tom@mail.well.com
> >Subject: Account Setup Complete
> >Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2003 04:54:45 +0400
> >X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2616
> >MIME-Version: 1.0
> >Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
> > boundary="EE6AB7F5.3E"
> >
> >Content-Type: text/plain;
> >
> >Dear Customer,
> >
> >Your new account is setup:
> >
> >Username: TN255412
> >Password: h3jsww
> >
[snip]
Without FULL headers, it's impossible to say for sure. However, the fact
that three different "customers" supposedly had the same account username
and password *should* tell you something.
I also dimly recall some talk about a credit-card phishing operation which
resembled this M.O. -- and the following line in particular tends to support
that theory:
> >Please note you will continue to be charged the rate below to your
> >credit card until you contact us to delete your account.
Why would such an "confirmation message", if it were legitimate, contain
that statement, especially worded _that_ way? They *assume* you're going to
delete the account? I don't think so.
--
Jay T. Blocksom
--------------------------------
Appropriate Technology, Inc.
usenet01[at]appropriate-tech.net
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
NOTE: E-Mail address in "From:" line is INVALID! Remove +SPAMBLOCK to mail.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Unsolicited advertising sent to this E-Mail address is expressly prohibited
under USC Title 47, Section 227. Violators are subject to charge of up to
$1,500 per incident or treble actual costs, whichever is greater.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Reply With Quote