I just got yet another scam telling me that my AOL account information had been stolen and directing me to go to the link provided and give them my credit card number. This one was more interesting than the rest because it wanted most of my life history, including my mother’s maiden name (often used to verify accounts) and my SS#. Of course, I am not so naive as to provide this information, but what I wonder is, why does AOL allow their name to be used in this kind of fraud? I would suspect that if they prosecuted just a few for very high dollars, the rest would be discouraged from attempting it.
Prosecute who? Got a name?
Don’t follow those links. Very often, there’s a worm attached to the page, and by visiting, you get it.
That said, these people are very hard to track. They may provide false information to the page host, and they may be outside of the US. That makes them a little hard to prosecute.
And just for the sake of everyone reading this thread, AOL will never ask for any of your personal information. Those that need it have access to it.
No, but there has to be some point of contact, be it a webpage or an email account, and the hosting provider for that page or accoutnt probably does. Since the party representing themselves as AOL is clearly commiting fraud, I suspect that most hosts would participate in a criminal investigation, should AOL file charges with the authorities.
And they’ll send you a postcard from someplace in Europe congratulating your effort.
I too am an (tries to hide pointed dunce cap) AOL user and have received more than a dozen similar e-mails. Just love those return e-mail links AOLBilling@hotmail.com. I dutifully reported the first few to the AOL fraud link, but never received even an automated conformation reply from them. I’m not asking for a hand typed “looking into it” message just some sense that this giant company registered some sort of concern that their name was being used to defraud Internet newbies.
I suppose I’m being naive to expect some large companies to attend to their customers after they’ve enrolled for a service but I am a little surprised that in light of plunging stock prices the companies shareholders haven’t registered their dissatisfaction with the companies management. Or perhaps enough of them did causing AOL’s share price to plummet.
Just to add, my mom got one several years ago - this one wanted everything too including not only the number on the checks but the little block symbol on them as well.
Recently I’ve been getting “Reactivate your ICQ account” with ICQ username and password required, and “Reactivate your Hotmail account”, in my hotmail inbox, from something like “hotmail_admin@hotmail.com”, using the hotmail livery in the body of the mail. Very clever indeed (though you’d think that Hotmail might be able to trace them kind of simply), and I wonder how many thousands of less suspicious people have fallen for it.
The admin of one of the MSN community sites I visit recently received this email:
:rolleyes: oh yeah, so [allegation of compaint]+[juvenile writing style]+[bizarre promise not to do harm(which we would expect as a default)]+[request for manager status (MSN can’t set this up themselves?)]+[threat] = [plausible request]?
I don’t think so.
Surely not everyone who sets up one of these schemes is smart enough to bounce through international hosts.
But enough are.
One reason is that, from a purely practical business economics standpoint, the fraud isn’t harming AOL. The fraudsters may be successful in thieving some money from a handful of AOL subscribers, but that doesn’t have any impact on AOL’s bottom line.
Paraphrasing Lili Tomlin: “We don’t care. We don’t have to. We’re AOL.”
Who defines enough? AOL could easily apply some Natural Selection pressure to this population of frauds until the only frauds who survive to propgate to the next generation are the ones who make themselves unprosicutable without geting INTERPOL involved.
Short answer: because it’s not worth it. The costs of pursuing a successful prosecution, especially internationally, outweight the benefits. AOL have apparently decided that it is cheaper and easier to put the onus on AOL users to be educated enough to recognise fraud. Prevention is better than cure and all that.
So you’re saying that AOL doesn’t entirely assume it’s customers are a bunch of idiots or slack-jawed yokels? Someone notify the press!
[credit card fraud analyst hat on]
Exactly. A lot of fraud would not happen if people used common sense.
A perfect example is the telemarketing scam rings. One calls people claiming to be from “Visa/Mastercard” (never indicating bank of issue, mind you) and offers the victim a 4.9 % fixed annual percentage rate for the lifetime of the account (the CEO of my bank doesn’t get a rate like that) for a one time fee of $389 (you can request rate reductions for free).
All they need is the full account number, expiration date and signature panel code to “process the order” and people hand it over, not thinking “hey, if they’re calling me from my bank, why don’t they know that information? And if they don’t have that info, where did they get my name and phone number from?”
If it sounds too good to be true, it is. If it involves an account of yours, contact the bank/ISP yourself and ask. If you get a call, tell the caller you’ll call the number on your card and hang up. Don’t give them ANY information.
I’ve heard tapes of these calls and these operators are well trained/scripted. Either they use scare tactics or are the most charming people on earth. If they’d only use those skills to get real jobs…
[credit card fraud analyst hat off]