What’s the difference?
How can you tell when it’s a genuine scammer rather than a Dell rep?
An email phisher found hiding in Kenya is facing up to two decades behind bars in America for scamming thousands of dollars from US universities. Amil Hassan Raage, 48, pleaded guilty on Thursday in a southern California court to one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud. The charge carries a maximum of 20 years …
"How can you tell when it’s a genuine scammer rather than a Dell rep?"
The difference between scammers and regular tech support reps is that the regular tech support reps don't have to admit guilt when they are caught nor do they have to do any jail time.
See here for example:
No crime is to be encouraged but of all the potential victims in this world American Universities can most afford it, so there should be some leniency here.
In this case the University of California has an $11 billion endowment; and...
The Office of the Chief Investment Officer of the Regents currently manages a portfolio of investments totaling approximately $120 billion, which includes retirement, endowment, and cash assets.
This almost reaches Goldman Sachs levels of unsympathy for their losses, except Stanford has a $26.5 billion endowment.
Plus, ah, whatever this chap nicked is barely anything compared with what the Regents themselves extracted on an on-going purpose:
The change in policy came hours after The Chronicle reported that the UC governing board billed the university for nearly a quarter of a million dollars since 2012 for dinners every two to three months.
SFChronicle 29 05 2017
If only these 'victims' would install checks and training, as well as controlling the validation of funds transfer, the scammers would be rendered ineffective.
While there are gullible people in positions of authority, there will always be scams: "Remember, Terry, you only get out of life what you put in, plus a bit extra if you can find a few mugs." Arthur Daley, in 'Minder', as played by the late, great George Cole.
Maybe we should just set up some sort of fund to compensate good causes like universities and charities who might be conned (by virtue of a stupid employee)
Money for the fund could come from a tax on the stupid. To ensure the stupid make regular payments we just need TV adverts promising life-changing sums of money - all they need to do is buy a ticket for a chance to win. Make it extra easy to play - with tickets prominently on sale at every corner shop. Make sure the odds of winning are only published in small print, and kept in boring numerical form (as opposed to easily understood statistics like for example 1/4 of the chance of being struck by lightning)
... oh wait we already have that...
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019