Well done, Jesper
Aside from the fanboi flame wars erupting in previous coments, let's get back to basics for a moment. This multi-layered techno-social engineering scam demonstrates 2 things:
1) the criminal business case to invest time & effort into coding such a Byzantine maze of tricks and traps for the ignorant (not in the perjoative sense of the word) masses is sound
2) the home computing paradigm is not sound, upon which the case in 1) above is based
I can think of no other purchase we make where we are seemingly willing to accept all the risk of vulnerabilities; nobody would buy a car if they knew that no matter what they did the clutch would burst into flames next Tuesday, &c
The balance of liability for malfunction between vendor and purchaser is so distorted in favour of the former in this computing malarkey compared to any other aspect of modern commerce it is almost beyond belief.
How have we, at a societal level, seemingly blundered blindfold into such a mess?
Now how best, at a societal level, are we to procede to redress this ridiculous imbalance?
The answer must lie in persuading legislatures to produce sotware liability laws. Lobby your MP, AM, deputy, representative, congressman - whatever title (s)he may have in your country - the computer software vendors must be legislated into taking financial liability for the flaws and faults in their products.
OBTW: "not part of user acceptance test plan" - precious ;-) - a coffee spluttering moment