Did a big company hack my email???

[BC_Programmer]

Are you are lawyer, by any chance, BC?

No. I'm stating facts.

When somebody says

"X performs Y", and, to present the unemotional example of "shovels Dig". It implies that the subject does this on it's own with absolutely no help.

However, I don't recall hearing about Shovels digging holes on their own.

In some locations, it is illegal to dig without first getting a survey done, because there is a known underground electrical, telephone, or other utility cable rather close to the surface. Not following this procedure results in a fine, and responsibility for any resulting service outage. However, I again cannot recall any particular instance where the shovel, or trowel that the person was using was held responsible for the actions of the person using said device. A shovel or other tool will indeed make digging said hole easier, but it hardly makes it possible; you can dig with your bare hands if necessary, but they have no cognition and thus no responsibility. Saying that any inanimate object is "responsible" for something is a gross personification of said device, and tries to absolves the ills of humanity onto a inanimate scapegoat. If a water pump fails in a nuclear reactor, the pump isn't held responsible at the inquisition- the lazy engineer who installed it is, or the company's disregard for safety.

The controversial nature of firearms however is probably rooted in the notion that they are, in effect, designed specifically to kill and injure. However, it doesn't follow logically that if they suddenly disappeared, or were removed in some other way, suddenly we'd be living in a pleasant utopia. Regardless of what laws and restrictions are enforced, people will find ways to kill and injure each other, and unless the plan is to make everybody a toothless torso that is never going to change.

My point is that in said cases, the device is not "responsible". the person is. Otherwise I could say that we should hold computers responsible for hacking. We don't; it's the people doing that hacking that are fined and/or sent to prison. I've always been surprised how much illogic the introduction of mortality brings to any debate, even when otherwise perfectly crafted analogies to said mortal situation make the express or implied suggestions ridiculous.

[patio]

Basically infected shovels with dynamite cannot spoof e-mail headers...

[Geek-9pm]

Basically infected shovels with dynamite cannot spoof e-mail headers...

Thank you Patio. It was not until you made this  brilliant summary could I perceive the greater meaning.

[BC_Programmer]

Basically infected shovels with dynamite cannot spoof e-mail headers...

Exactly, but many criminal organizations are working on ways to fix that.

The results will no doubt be explosive.

[patio]

Thank you Patio. It was not until you made this  brilliant summary could I perceive the greater meaning.

Just one of the many services we offer here...

[soybean]

*Collusion. This the term might be hard to clarify. But it means just what you think in means in this context.
If you want protection from your Credit Card company, you have to ask for it. Really. Not a joke. In the USA you have to ask for it. Failure to do so you  thus are giving them the opportunity to work with the criminals. That is, in effect, collusion.

"If you want protection from your Credit Card company, you have to ask for it."  Non-sense.  Obviously, if you suspect some unauthorized/fraudulent activity has occurred in your credit card account, then you'd have to contact them and let them know so that they can investigate from their end.  And, "In the US, federal law limits the liability of card holders to $50 in the event of theft of the actual credit card, regardless of the amount charged on the card, if reported within 60 days of receiving the statement."* 

*Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credit_card_fraud

[Geek-9pm]

Good post. Soybean.
Now if everyone will read the article carefully.
Here is part of it:

To protect themselves against electronic identity theft by phishing, hacking or malware, individual are well advised to maintain computer security, for example by keeping their operating systems fully patched against known security vulnerabilities, running antivirus software and being cautious in their use of IT.

Now does that somehow indict little effort is require to protect yourself and that it is automatic and e-mail and computer use is a non issue? After all. computer don't commit crimes. only criminals commit crimes. So if you don't let a criminal use you computer there is just nothing to worry about. But if a criminal does use your computer, then you must be the criminal. 

And pf course the Big Business firms do not make it easy for criminals. Just ask them. They never do that. They will also tell, but not in these exact words.: "In the legal system of the USA, consumer credulity is a crime commuted by the stupid victim who trusts others  and can result in  twenty years to Life of misery with no parole.

WARNING
The link below has not been verified by the Ad-hoc Computer Hope vigilantes committee.
Read at you own risk.
It may be not relevant to this topic.

47 Identity Theft Horror Stories

[Allan]

WARNING
The link below has not been verified by the Ad-hoc Computer Hope vigilantes committee.
Read at you own risk.
It may be not relevant to this topic.

That's not only uncalled for, it comes from the person more responsible for taking threads off topic than anyone else here.

[BC_Programmer]

But if a criminal does use your computer, then you must be the criminal. 

Nope.

consumer credulity is a crime commuted by the stupid victim who trusts others  and can result in  twenty years to Life of misery with no parole.

It's not a crime. the victim isn't "stupid", by any stretch of the imagination.

[Geek-9pm]

That's not only uncalled for, it comes from the person more responsible for taking threads off topic than anyone else here.

No, it was me-- Not BC_Programmer.

[BC_Programmer]

No, it was me-- Not BC_Programmer.

Quite right. Reply #12.

[Geek-9pm]

This thread should have come to an end. Yes, I am guilty of diverting the topic. Let me redeem myself, if that is possible.
I have been the victim of Cyber scams myself. The loss was both money and intellectual property. The money was under $200, but the loss of my domain names is hard to estimate.

Big companies, and small ones too, are abusive. If they believe they can get sway with it, some will do whatever they can to promote their own interests ahead of the welfare of others.

I still hold to my position that guarding your information and changing your e-mails address is important. Once your e-mail address is on a list, it is hard to get it off.

Some users have at least two e-mails boxes that are active. One for real family or business mail, the other for junk and RSS feeds and stuff like that. Cyber security is still a very serious concern. You have to protect yourself. And I will quote the above post
.

Suggestions to Keep Your card Protected
- Do not throw away your bills in a open public garbage can
- Eliminate docs that contain delicate data before disposing them from your home
- Neglect email messages that ask for your card data. Take notice that phishing and fake email messages are the top sources of online scams

The is good advice!

[Raptor]

It's spam, Geek. 

[Geek-9pm]

It's spam, Geek. 

What do you mean? The topic is:

Re: Did a big company hack my email???

The OP suspects a spammer got into his e-mail. Otherwise, how did they know to target this individual.

[BC_Programmer]

This thread should have come to an end.

It had, until, somewhat ironically, a forum spammer posted in it.

I have been the victim of Cyber scams myself. The loss was both money and intellectual property. The money was under $200, but the loss of my domain names is hard to estimate.

Wow. How the heck did that happen?

Big companies, and small ones too, are abusive. If they believe they can get sway with it, some will do whatever they can to promote their own interests ahead of the welfare of others.

You are confusing things here. Spam isn't abusive. spam doesn't have viruses. That would defeat the purpose. The entire purpose of spam is basically to use E-mail to reach prospective customers. If they pay for a commercial, their commercial appears on TV and a few hundred people might see it and be interested. They have to pay more for more viewers; E-mail, on the other hand, is cheap; even cheaper than "junk mail"; there is no envelope, no stamps, no postage; etc. And they can reach millions of prospective customers. In many ways it would be stupid to <not> follow that route. There is a difference between the E-mail from the "Nigerian Prince" and the E-mail trying to sell you pharmaceuticals; the first one is trying to con you out of money, the second is trying to sell you a product. The first is illegal nearly anywhere; the second is legal.

I still hold to my position that guarding your information and changing your e-mails address is important. Once your e-mail address is on a list, it is hard to get it off.

I've used my E-mail address for going on quite a number of years and I've yet to have any problems. And what are you guarding your information (what information?) from? This is the same as trying to protect your street address to prevent junk mail. How do you think those companies get your street address? It's usually easy to look it up in a telephone book. It's no less easy to get an E-mail address. Many otherwise reputable companies may very well have employees with access to the internal e-mail listings that sell those lists; The only "protected" E-mail address is the one that doesn't exist.


The post you quote, by the way, is the one Raptor was talking about. It's a spammer. The fact that you still cannot tell what spam is is a bit disconcerting.