[HN Gopher] What's the deal with all those weird wrong-number te...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       What's the deal with all those weird wrong-number texts?
        
       Author : minimaxir
       Score  : 561 points
       Date   : 2022-07-01 17:25 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (maxread.substack.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (maxread.substack.com)
        
       | fortran77 wrote:
       | I still have friends and relatives who respond with "sorry! I
       | think you have the wrong number" despite my warning turn just to
       | delete the message and forget it. People just want to be
       | "helpful"
        
       | al_borland wrote:
       | Thank you!
       | 
       | I've been wondering what the scam was. I've gotten 3 of these so
       | far. I've received actual wrong number texts in the past, so I
       | want to let the person know they got the wrong number and aren't
       | getting ghosted by their friend. But they just keep texting back,
       | which is really weird.
       | 
       | With the first one I didn't know what was going on the person
       | said they just moved to the country, which is plausible, so I
       | didn't want to be a jerk, but when she asked for my name I
       | stopped replying. When the 2nd one came with with the same
       | pattern it was clear there was some kind of scam going on, but I
       | couldn't for the life of me figure out what it could be, as they
       | weren't asking for anything.
        
         | milchek wrote:
         | This sounds to me like a relationship long con.
         | 
         | A lot of people are isolated and lonely, not just the elderly.
         | The scammer tries to create a spontaneous meet that seems
         | genuine. If you engage then it's about quickly developing a
         | relationship and then if that works, asking for money.
         | 
         | I wonder how much of this can be automated these days. This
         | sort of scam usually requires a lot of effort and is more
         | targeted. Since many are claiming ti be targeted now it could
         | be a sign that scammers have been able to automate it with some
         | basic scripts or even AI so it can scale.
        
           | al_borland wrote:
           | Yep, that's pretty much what the article says. They take
           | several weeks before getting to the scam.
           | 
           | Someone messaged me on Reddit a while back pretty randomly
           | after a comment I made mentioned it would be my birthday at
           | some point in the year. It seemed a little too weird, she
           | said we lived 30 minutes from each other. I didn't know if it
           | was a girl or a guy for quite a long time, so there was no
           | relationship talk. We both wrote really long detailed
           | replies, much more than any script would be able to handle.
           | Ended up meeting up with her and it was in fact a real
           | person, but I was very up front with my skepticism very early
           | on in the chat. Even after we met up I said something about
           | how I was half expecting my car to be broken into or
           | something. She ghosted me afterward, lol. Maybe it was a
           | relationship long con, but I didn't look like I was worth
           | conning or I was still too on edge and not engaging enough to
           | make it worth the time she'd have to put in to make me not
           | think she was scamming me. Or I'm just boring, ugly, and
           | weird. Whatever, she basically just complained about work for
           | an hour.
        
       | teeray wrote:
       | I love trolling these scammers by being the right number they
       | never expected. One time I had one looking for a price list on
       | precious materials. I sent them prices for Adamantium, Tiberium,
       | and Xen crystal. The confusion was fantastic.
        
       | spc476 wrote:
       | Two weeks ago I received an email saying I had funds in Bitcoin
       | and I could cash out, with login details for a website account
       | [1]. I knew this must be a scam, but for the life of me, I
       | couldn't figure out the angle. Now I'm thinking it's a similar
       | type of scam.
       | 
       | [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZ_flb9tGuc
        
         | WalterSear wrote:
         | Probably a wallet drainer. Connect it with your wallet and
         | empties it.
         | 
         | https://blog.confiant.com/how-one-crypto-drainer-template-fa...
        
           | kccqzy wrote:
           | Any person who is remotely knowledgeable about bitcoin should
           | know that there is no need to "connect your wallet" or reveal
           | your private key to receive bitcoins. To receive, you only
           | need the address which is basically a public key.
        
             | WalterSear wrote:
             | Most people in crypto _aren 't_ remotely knowledgeable
             | about bitcoin: luring in rubes is almost the entirety of
             | the crypto industry's thesis, not to mention comprising
             | it's (actual) market cap.
             | 
             | To wit: the wallet-drainer billboards that popped up around
             | the NFT NYC and Eth Nyc conferences this year:
             | 
             | https://blog.malwarebytes.com/scams/2022/06/rogue-
             | cryptocurr...
        
               | yourad_io wrote:
               | > However, a "wallet drainer" is just another way of
               | saying "phishing website"
               | 
               | From the article
        
       | bee_rider wrote:
       | Ah, about 20 years ago I think a relative responded to a, I think
       | it was, an "I'm here at the airport, don't see you anywhere" kind
       | of email. This was before spam filters got good, so that email
       | address was basically kaput.
        
         | Apocryphon wrote:
         | I often do respond to such messages pretending I am the person
         | they're trying to reach. It confuses them and they stumble over
         | their script.
        
           | rdtsc wrote:
           | That's what I do when I am bored. I figure if I can keep
           | engaged a bit longer they'll have less time to scam others.
        
       | libpcap wrote:
        
       | luxurytent wrote:
       | Not directly mentioned in this article, but the strategies shown
       | here were exactly the ones used by the Tindler Swindler, which
       | has a surprisingly enjoyable documentary
       | (https://www.imdb.com/title/tt14992922/)
        
       | cdelsolar wrote:
       | I basically just send them all a big copy-pasta full of banned
       | Chinese terms like 6/4, Free Tibet, Tiananmen Square, Winnie the
       | Pooh, etc; they often leave me alone after that or act confused
        
         | wpietri wrote:
         | This warms my heart! I'm going to start pretending like I know
         | them, sending Wikipedia links to those topics, and asking what
         | they think.
        
         | carabiner wrote:
         | TIL Winnie the Pooh is banned in China
        
       | ElijahLynn wrote:
       | Well researched for sure, good read as I had some of these
       | recently too and am glad now to understand more about it.
       | 
       | What I do want to highlight is the deeper "why", and that is
       | "why" are these people doing this? There must be a fundamental
       | survival mechanism here, in a larger chain. These people may not
       | have opportunities, the ones holding others captive. What kind of
       | environment is needed to create this type of behavior? Surely we
       | must address that at the core of it all. I think it comes down to
       | basic resources, and this is where I think the vision of Jacque
       | Fresco and The Venus Project can come into play. Which is to
       | create a resource-based economy and evolve as a civilization to
       | taking care of one another, it is a form of democratic socialism,
       | which I think can solve this type of issue, and help us all be
       | more integrated and happier.
        
         | kelnos wrote:
         | I feel like if someone has the resources to kidnap a bunch of
         | people and hold them captive in a large, heavily-guarded office
         | building, while forcing them to scam people over the internet,
         | they probably have the resources to do something not-scammy.
         | 
         | Stuff like this just erodes my faith in humanity. Humans are
         | not fundamentally good. So many people want to prey on the weak
         | or gullible, not only because it can be easy and lucrative, but
         | because they get off on that kind of power dynamic.
        
       | RajT88 wrote:
       | I had one of these exchanges recently which I had some fun with,
       | because it was so weird, and they made a point to use a photo of
       | a beautiful woman:
       | 
       | Lady: Doctor Lucy? My puppy is very slow and does not eat dog
       | food, can you make an appointment for me?
       | 
       | Me: Unfortunately I do not treat puppies. Only adult dogs,
       | adolescent foxes, and elderly coyotes.
       | 
       | Lady: Sorry, I added the wrong person, I just checked the number
       | and I saved the wrong number for Dr. Lucy.
       | 
       | I left it at that. I wonder if I should try and bait the scammer.
       | I do love messing with scammers. After the last message I was
       | thinking maybe it was legitimately a wrong number.
        
       | jesterpm wrote:
       | These, and the spoofed number phone calls where the other side
       | just hangs up when you answer. For the phone calls, I just
       | assumed that someone was trying to build a database of phone
       | numbers that do or do not answer for some other/future purpose...
        
         | chefandy wrote:
         | Based on the delays in these sorts of calls, I'd guess that
         | they're robocalls which dial way more numbers than they have
         | operators for and try to filter out no-answer and voicemail
         | pickups automatically. Then if you pick up, they route you to
         | an operator. If there's no operator available, it just drops
         | the call rather than reveal which annoying company just wasted
         | your time. That way the operators-- clearly the most expensive
         | link in the chain -- are always engaged. Just a guess though!
         | 
         | Even if that's wrong, I'm sure you're right that they collect
         | caller-pick-up stats. I imagine even cursory vetting would
         | dramatically increase the resale value of their lead list.
        
       | musesum wrote:
       | South African YouTuber with Chinese wife, and thus knows the
       | language, plays along:
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZ_flb9tGuc
        
       | tomc1985 wrote:
       | It's an attempt at the 'pig-butchering' scam, they act friendly
       | to get you hooked and then claim to teach you how to trade
       | bitcoin. From what I remember reading it was a popular fraud in
       | mainland China but they are branching out internationally because
       | locals are getting wise to it and it is not widely known
       | worldwide.
       | 
       | In my experience and in the other descriptions I've read, it is
       | always a woman business owner from Asia, acts somewhat friendly
       | and flirty, will talk about life with you in a very superficial
       | way for a while in order to build a relationship. After a while
       | they hit you with... a crypto scam or something? Like teaching
       | you how to trade bitcoin but using some shady weird exchange that
       | makes off with your money when you fund your account.
       | 
       | https://myclevertrust.com/post/34/2021-07-06-sha-zhu-pan-the...
       | 
       | https://www.reddit.com/r/Scams/comments/na8oax/asian_guygirl...
        
       | tintor wrote:
       | This would be a great way to monetize GPT-3!
       | 
       | (this is a joke)
        
       | muststopmyths wrote:
       | I got one of these, almost convincing enough except she said she
       | lived in SF. I asked where in SF and she said Alcatraz. I almost
       | wanted to keep the conversation going just to hear more about her
       | life on the island
        
         | al_borland wrote:
         | That was just a metaphor. She feels trapped by her life and
         | you're her only way to freedom.
        
         | wolfgang42 wrote:
         | It's like that bit from _The Great Gatsby:_
         | 
         | > "What part of the Middle West?"
         | 
         | > "San Francisco."
        
         | themaninthedark wrote:
         | Almost sounds like a cry for help. O_o Probably not though.
        
         | iancmceachern wrote:
         | I had a similar one. They called me spoofing the local PD phone
         | number and pretending to be the local cops with a very poor
         | fake US accent. I was able to stump them when I asked if the
         | Giants won last night. They went silent and hung up.
        
       | walrus01 wrote:
       | I am ordinarily loathe to link to reddit, but
       | 
       | https://reddit.com/r/scams
       | 
       | has a wealth of information and examples of these
        
       | johnklos wrote:
       | Simple: it's time to stop using phone numbers.
       | 
       | I use Apple's Messages. If someone spams me, I report them.
       | They're blocked and have to go through the extra work of setting
       | up a new account to try again.
       | 
       | Compare this with, say, Google. Gmail lets spammers / scammers
       | have limitless accounts and they don't do shit when an account is
       | reported for spam. You can block and report Gmail spammers all
       | day long and you'll get nowhere.
       | 
       | WhatsApp apparently still uses phone numbers, and they're owned
       | by a company that wants engagement at ANY price. Are any of us
       | really so dumb that we think they're going to do the right thing?
        
         | ntoskrnl wrote:
         | I'd give anything to get rid of my phone, but almost everyone
         | you do business with (DMV, electric/gas/water company, etc)
         | expects you to have one. Same thing with USPS and their paper
         | spam. At this point they're little more than government-
         | mandated spam delivery channels. Private companies are handling
         | the spam situation infinitely better.
        
           | 0des wrote:
           | You aren't mandated to have mail or phone.
           | 
           | Edit: Noting a lot of downvotes on this comment, which is
           | odd. I can only conclude one thing- don't be Amish on HN.
           | 
           | Perhaps this could be an opportunity to explore a different
           | way of life, and a different community structure. It is not
           | all horse buggies and barns.
           | 
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6SlJZk5guI&list=PLEyPgwIPkH.
           | ..
        
             | pessimizer wrote:
             | I'm pretty sure you are mandated to have mail in the US, or
             | rather the mails are mandated to deliver to you. IIRC it's
             | constitutional.
        
               | 0des wrote:
               | > I'm pretty sure you are mandated to have mail in the
               | US, or rather the mails are mandated to deliver to you.
               | IIRC it's constitutional.
               | 
               | You'd be incorrect. Ask your postmaster.
        
               | criddell wrote:
               | They are correct. The USPS has a universal service
               | obligation. If you send a letter or parcel to any address
               | in the US, the post office must deliver it.
        
               | 0des wrote:
               | I respectfully disagree. The postal service is held to a
               | standard of service by a USO - Universal Service
               | Obligation. [0]
               | 
               | This means it is an org mandated to accept your request
               | for service at a reasonable price regardless of your
               | location of residence. There is an important distinction
               | between that, and being mandated to receive mail service.
               | That is not a stipulation of being alive in USA.
               | 
               | [0] - https://www.uspsoig.gov/blog/postal-service-and-
               | its-obligati...
        
               | zdragnar wrote:
               | Just imagine, every drifter, nomad and homeless person
               | were required to set up a mailbox. It's just silly.
        
               | nobody9999 wrote:
               | >Just imagine, every drifter, nomad and homeless person
               | were required to set up a mailbox. It's just silly.
               | 
               | They don't have to. Just have mail sent to:
               | Joe/Jane Drifter       General Delivery
               | TownNearWhereYouSquat, <State> <ZipCode of post office>
               | 
               | Or at least that's how it's been done for decades.
        
               | philwelch wrote:
               | Yeah but they never have to come in and pick it up and I
               | doubt the post office retains that mail in perpetuity
               | until it's picked up.
        
               | nobody9999 wrote:
               | https://www.usglobalmail.com/usps-general-delivery/
        
             | philwelch wrote:
             | I can understand the concept of Amish communities not
             | having telephones or mailboxes, but that lifestyle seems
             | inconsistent with the behavior of arguing for the merits of
             | that lifestyle on Hacker News.
        
             | ntoskrnl wrote:
             | Sure, I could move to the woods and live off wild berries
             | for the rest of my days. But if you want to be part of
             | modern society, your bank will mail you your credit card,
             | and your water company will text you a code to login and
             | pay. Realistically, what choice do you have?
        
               | the_only_law wrote:
               | > Sure, I could move to the woods and live off wild
               | berries for the rest of my days
               | 
               | You'd probably just be removed from someones property
               | eventually.
        
               | 0des wrote:
               | Do you not encounter Amish people where you live?
        
               | ntoskrnl wrote:
               | I wasn't offended and didn't downvote you. But the Amish
               | do receive mail and use phones.
               | 
               | First article I found: https://amishamerica.com/do-amish-
               | use-telephones/
        
               | zdragnar wrote:
               | Every community decides for itself what technologies to
               | adapt. The nearest to me have a single phone booth in the
               | front yard of one member's house. Anyone wants to use the
               | phone, they go there to make a call, and most only use it
               | if they need to make an appointment at a hospital for
               | serious illnesses.
               | 
               | Others not quite as close are a fair degree more liberal
               | in what they adopt, while I imagine there's probably a
               | few that are more strict.
        
               | 0des wrote:
               | > But the Amish do receive mail and use phones.
               | 
               | I am assuming you don't mean to generalize to the degree
               | that is being conveyed at first glance in your explainer
               | comment.
               | 
               | Amish people are not a monolith. As a culture it is quite
               | a spectrum, from Beachy to Swartzentruber.
        
               | ntoskrnl wrote:
               | My experience is based on visits to an Amish town in Ohio
               | when I was growing up in the 2000s. I distinctly remember
               | being surprised to see they used phones and rode in cars.
               | But that was a long time ago and only one town of many. I
               | didn't mean to generalize all Amish communities.
        
               | 0des wrote:
               | No worries. It takes all kinds. Who knows, maybe you re-
               | examine the culture and find some things you'd like to
               | take home to your community.
        
           | kube-system wrote:
           | I don't think I agree with that. I rarely get scams via USPS,
           | never get explicit or potentially damaging content, the
           | senders are all in my legal jurisdiction, and the spam
           | arrives once per day in a manageable format. Almost all of
           | the content is from businesses in my local area, businesses
           | that I have previously shopped at, or political ads.
           | 
           | Electronically from private companies I frequently get a
           | larger volume of spam, malware, scams, explicit content, and
           | most of them originate outside of my legal jurisdiction to
           | evade the law. And it's a steady stream all day, on multiple
           | mediums.
           | 
           | I'd take 10x the amount of spam in my mailbox if I could get
           | rid of all of the rest of the garbage I'm bombarded with. I
           | obviously would rather not have any of it, but the hoops you
           | have to jump through to send snail-mail inherently filters
           | out most of the worst garbage.
        
             | SoftTalker wrote:
             | I have the idea (maybe wrongly) that people don't often use
             | the USPS for scams because committing fraud by mail is a
             | federal crime, and the postal service actually has
             | inspectors with police powers who don't fool around once
             | they get on the scent.
        
               | kube-system wrote:
               | It's illegal to scam people electronically too. People
               | often scam internationally to evade capture. Email is
               | just considerably cheaper to send internationally and
               | easier to spoof the source.
               | 
               | How many letters do you have to send before you find
               | someone stupid enough to believe that they have to pay
               | the IRS via gift card _and_ that the IRS return address
               | is in Russia? If anyone has tried, they went bankrupt on
               | postage.
        
               | nobody9999 wrote:
               | >I have the idea (maybe wrongly) that people don't often
               | use the USPS for scams because committing fraud by mail
               | is a federal crime, and the postal service actually has
               | inspectors with police powers who don't fool around once
               | they get on the scent.
               | 
               | Apparently, mail fraud[0] (via USPS) and wire fraud[1]
               | (electronic communications) are both Federal felonies
               | punishable by a fine and up to 20 years imprisonment.
               | 
               | Perhaps the difference would be FBI investigating instead
               | of the postal inspectors?
               | 
               | More detail here[2].
               | 
               | N.B.: IANAL
               | 
               | [0] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1341
               | 
               | [1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1343
               | 
               | [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mail_and_wire_fraud
        
             | xmprt wrote:
             | > I'd take 10x the amount of spam in my mailbox if I could
             | get rid of all of the rest of the garbage I'm bombarded
             | with
             | 
             | I for one would not. Digital spam is easy to deal with.
             | There are automated filters, easy ways to block them, and
             | the few that slip through are simple to deal with. Mailbox
             | spam is physically painful to deal with and it's a massive
             | waste of paper.
        
               | metadat wrote:
               | It is without a doubt a shameful waste, but how is it
               | physically painful? Did you get a paper cut
               | 
               | Personally I find it emotionally painful and depressing
               | to deal with. It sucks to be physically confronted with
               | the reality that my personal contact information is being
               | passed around like a bitch in prison.
        
               | kube-system wrote:
               | Email is the least of my problems. If you know of any
               | good filters for SMS, phone calls, LinkedIn, Snapchat,
               | Instagram, etc, I'd be very interested. I have to mute
               | all of them because it is a constant stream of garbage
               | from all of them.
        
               | rglullis wrote:
               | For Snapchat/LinkedIn/Instagram: just close your account
               | and put email filters?
        
               | kube-system wrote:
               | In that case, the problem is just as easy to solve with
               | snail mail. Remove your mailbox and your mail will be
               | returned as undeliverable.
        
               | xmprt wrote:
               | You are legally required to be reachable by mail by the
               | US government. Unless you're planning on being an
               | undocumented citizen living on US land off the grid, you
               | will need a mail box.
        
               | krallja wrote:
               | Paper is a renewable resource, and also a carbon sink.
               | Throw it in the garbage and consider it carbon
               | sequestration.
        
               | SoftTalker wrote:
               | Unfortunately I'd bet that the paper production and
               | delivery to your mailbox emits much more carbon than the
               | paper itself sequesters.
        
               | krallja wrote:
               | Exclude that as a sunk cost: the paper is coming to your
               | mailbox either way. The only difference is, does the
               | carbon get sequestered in the dump, or does it prevent
               | another artificially-fast-growing pine from being
               | processed into paper? Which of those options is less
               | damaging? I don't have the data, but I feel like it's
               | probably pretty close.
        
               | seoaeu wrote:
               | Long term, the paper will decompose while sitting in the
               | landfill and then release the carbon back into the
               | atmosphere. Even temporary sequestration is beneficial,
               | but I don't know whether it is still a net positive once
               | you factor in the resources spent growing the wood,
               | mailing the paper, and transporting it to a landfill.
        
               | kube-system wrote:
               | Many landfills in the US capture carbon emissions. My
               | local landfill sells their methane to the local gas
               | utility.
        
               | philwelch wrote:
               | And then people burn the methane in their stove, thus
               | producing CO2.
        
               | seoaeu wrote:
               | Many US landfills capture _methane_ , since they can then
               | profitably sell/burn it. I haven't seen anything about
               | them capturing all the CO2 emitted, which would be much
               | trickier.
        
         | teawrecks wrote:
         | Apple Messages could have become an open standard to replace
         | SMS, but they deliberately chose not to in the interest of
         | locking in existing users, and locking out anyone too poor to
         | own an iPhone. I'm not exaggerating, this is public knowledge.
         | 
         | https://old.reddit.com/r/Android/comments/mn2qyj/apple_decli...
         | 
         | So which one is "owned by a company that wants engagement at
         | any price" again?
        
         | oefrha wrote:
         | These days I get a lot more spam through Apple services, mostly
         | in the form of iCloud shared albums, than I get SMS spam.
        
         | cglong wrote:
         | > Compare this with, say, Google.
         | 
         | Google Messages proactively detects spam texts and sends them
         | to a spam folder, so I don't get notifications about these
         | messages at all :)
        
           | gnopgnip wrote:
           | Google voice has a poor shaken stir implementation that only
           | blocks the most egregious spam calls and sms and does not let
           | users choose to be more strict. It also does not support
           | blocking phone numbers by pattern/prefix.
        
         | quadyeast wrote:
         | Apple Messages breaks if you temporarily use a different phone
         | number on your cell. All chats in old threads were broken off
         | into different threads. It was a disaster. You would think that
         | since Apple knows this is still the same user that this would
         | not happen?
        
         | idiotsecant wrote:
         | I don't want one company to be the arbiter of all
         | communications everywhere. Phone numbers work fine.
        
           | XorNot wrote:
           | Phone numbers work fine but we're missing solid cryptographic
           | verification systems on top of them.
           | 
           | Why are registered businesses not verifiable? Or at least
           | banks and government departments? Why can't phones hold an ID
           | in their cloud profiles so switching numbers let's your
           | friends auto-uodate to you?
           | 
           | We could be doing so much better (with the goal of making it
           | practical to whitelist only operate).
        
           | eropple wrote:
           | Phone numbers have the same problem as email, though: because
           | "everyone" is responsible, no one is responsible. The deluge
           | of spam texts and calls to my public phone number is
           | genuinely unpleasant and frustrating to deal with as, like,
           | _a person living in the world_.
           | 
           | I practically don't use email anymore for those reasons, and
           | a phone number hangs around only because right now I can't
           | not have one for legal-type reasons.
        
             | walrus01 wrote:
             | email, at least, you can fully implement your own antispam
             | solution in whatever way you want
             | 
             | at one extreme, you can just point the mx records for your
             | domain at office365 or gsuite or similar and let them
             | handle it
             | 
             | at the other extreme, you can point the mx records at your
             | own mailserver you admin yourself and do absolutely
             | anything you want with the incoming smtp mail flow for
             | antispam measures, sorting, filtering, categorization, risk
             | analysis.
             | 
             | the ordinary person even if they work for a telecom
             | _cannot_ implement their own phone number at one of the
             | most fundamental levels of the pstn, because they don 't
             | run their own ss7 switch.
             | 
             | if you control your own DID and interface with it from a
             | sip trunk to a trusted provider, running your own voip
             | system, you can do a lot with custom routing/antispam
             | measures on incoming call flow, but nowhere near to the
             | extent that you can with email.
        
               | nijave wrote:
               | There's still a little bit of control near the client end
               | with things like call screening and phone apps that
               | checks numbers against a database. You can't reject the
               | initial connection (like DNS blocklists) but it's still
               | something
        
             | rglullis wrote:
             | The way to solve this is by educating the people in your
             | network about better security practices, not by giving away
             | control over your communications just because of
             | "convenience".
        
               | eropple wrote:
               | "Just get everyone to be perfect, including random
               | companies who require a phone number for validation, and
               | if a single failure ever happens you're going to be
               | spammed forever in a way that is directly interruptive
               | and intrusive instead of one in a list of messages in a
               | queue."
               | 
               | I don't know how to say this any more nicely than this:
               | this is a permanently losing solution with no redeeming
               | qualities to such a degree that it makes me wonder at how
               | in-good-faith the suggestion actually is with regards to
               | solving the stated problem.
        
               | rglullis wrote:
               | The point is not to "be perfect", the point is to raise
               | the standard of acceptable practices, to make it harder
               | to abuse it.
               | 
               | Just as an example: phone numbers should not be used for
               | validation of anything as they are public. So companies
               | who are requiring phones for any kind of authentication
               | should be shamed into changing their practices, much like
               | we learned to not trust companies that stored passwords
               | in plain text, or use "recovery questions".
        
               | eropple wrote:
               | The abuse is that without sufficient guardrails a ten-
               | digit number can be used to bother me at all hours of the
               | day or night _unless_ I want to be less accessible to
               | people who I may need to hear from, _not_ that it 's used
               | as an authentication source (which, yeah, not great, but
               | also not the end of the world).
               | 
               | Out-of-band authentication aside, a company is going to
               | retain my phone number to be able to contact me. So are
               | my parents. Somebody is also going to inevitably leak it
               | because _security is difficult_. Breaking the
               | capabilities of bad actors, then, is a requirement. You
               | have entirely ignored this in favor of blame-the-user
               | rhetoric and I can 't come up with a great reason why
               | you'd blame every user for a systemic failure other than
               | that the system cannot be repaired.
        
               | rglullis wrote:
               | > Somebody is also going to inevitably leak it because
               | security is difficult.
               | 
               | Phone numbers were and will always be assumed to be
               | public. (Yellow pages are still a thing)
               | 
               | > unless I want to be less accessible to people who I may
               | need to hear from.
               | 
               | You don't need to be less accessible to anyone. Your
               | phone can and should be able to filter things for you.
               | 
               | And is not just a matter of setting up number filtering,
               | I am talking about implementing changes in the
               | application layer. One could imagine, e.g, a phone app
               | that only rings if the caller provides a secret code
               | provided by you, effectively making you reachable by
               | phone number (public) + caller-specific code (private).
               | You could also make that if you have the code on your
               | addressbook, it sends it via DTMF after the call being
               | completed.
               | 
               | > other than that the system cannot be repaired.
               | 
               | It _can_ be repaired, it is just that the cost of these
               | changes might be too high if mandated for all network
               | operators.
               | 
               | But even if the system couldn't be repaired, the solution
               | is not to encourage adoption of a proprietary solution.
               | Apple already controls way too much stuff, we shouldn't
               | give them _yet another_ monopoly for them to exploit.
        
           | narag wrote:
           | _I don 't want one company to be the arbiter of all
           | communications everywhere. Phone numbers work fine._
           | 
           | For me too and if there is an application that allows to
           | block numbers, spam is not a problem.
           | 
           | Now I use the Google builtin caller app antispam function.
           | Most of the spam numbers have already been marked as such by
           | somebody else. Even if that didn't exist I could just block
           | the number after the fact and no more calls or SMSs.
           | 
           | I'd rather program that myself than relying the functionality
           | to Google, I hope Pine or some other programmable phone gets
           | to a usable state some day. But as of now, it's good enough.
           | 
           | Edit: I'm in Spain, not sure if that works the same in the
           | USA.
        
           | LinuxBender wrote:
           | I agree with this.
           | 
           | For what it's worth my solution _which may not work for
           | others_ is to set the default ring /text tone to "None" and
           | then add custom ring/text tones in my address book on my
           | little throw away flip phone. It works great for me
           | personally. I never get distracted by bots and just mass
           | delete their messages without even looking at them when I get
           | around to it. This method probably will not work for people
           | glued to their phones.
        
             | xenophonf wrote:
             | I'm considering doing that to my personal email. Default
             | deny, whitelist known contacts, auto delete the junk mail
             | folder. If I didn't have friends and family using them, I'd
             | just outlook.com and gmail.com outright. It's frustrating
             | how much spam they send.
        
             | cronix wrote:
             | An android solution is to only ring/notify the phone for
             | people in your contacts. It's easier than giving
             | individuals a ring tone as unknowns get the silent
             | treatment by default. Basically just whitelist instead of
             | blacklist.
        
               | jamiek88 wrote:
               | Same is available on iOS. Used it for a while and it
               | works well.
        
           | pbhjpbhj wrote:
           | It would be good if phone companies weren't quite so
           | complicit in hiding companies behind anonymous phone numbers,
           | and relaying numbers for which they don't have verified
           | origin info.
        
             | creeble wrote:
             | Supposedly today is the day that even the small carriers
             | that were previously exempt from not having to comply with
             | STIR/SHAKEN will now have to.
             | 
             | But its meaninglessness is demonstrated by the fact that I
             | have received two spam calls (complete with "accurate"
             | caller ID) since starting to read these comments.
             | 
             | So yeah. The phone companies are all complicit.
        
         | vorpalhex wrote:
         | And when Apple bans you.. what is your plan exactly?
        
         | verall wrote:
         | Do you just, not talk to people electronically who do not own
         | Apple devices?
        
         | jsmith45 wrote:
         | >Simple: it's time to stop using phone numbers.
         | 
         | So don't be like Google Pay? (Which originally used proper
         | accounts but was switched to be based on phone numbers,
         | specifically because the new google pay was developed targeting
         | India, where phone number based login is considered normal
         | thanks to apps like WhatsApp.)
        
         | jthrowsitaway wrote:
         | Assuming you're talking about iMessage, comparing that to
         | E-mail (GMail) is literally apples and oranges.
        
           | ilololed wrote:
           | They're comparing it to SMS and voice calling on Android (and
           | apples and oranges are very similar)
        
         | sircastor wrote:
         | I'm a new WhatsApp user. My exchange students and Au Pair use
         | it as their primary communication. I have been fighting tooth
         | and nail to avoid giving it access to my contacts. You can't do
         | much without that, even though it's totally adjacent to purpose
         | of the service.
        
         | CharlesW wrote:
         | I don't know how effective it is, but I report all SMS spam to
         | my carrier (for T-Mobile, send content to 7726).
         | 
         | Does anyone here have inside knowledge about whether this does
         | any good?
        
           | Teever wrote:
           | Well you're still getting spam, so probably not?
        
             | CharlesW wrote:
             | Turns out there's more than one spammer.
        
         | walrus01 wrote:
         | saying stop using phone numbers and then going directly into
         | 
         | "hey, use this one proprietary vendor's closed source walled
         | garden messaging app"
         | 
         | is NOT a solution.
         | 
         | people should be looking at things like Signal or custom
         | implementations of Matrix/Element/Synapse or similar if they
         | want real control of their two way chat communications.
        
           | johnklos wrote:
           | I'm sorry that you can't see how I could be making an
           | example. I didn't say anything like, "do this instead". I
           | said, "I've done this".
        
       | ctoth wrote:
       | Terrified to consider what happens when these scammers get hold
       | of large language models here in a year or so. Rather than fading
       | into the background as this article posits, I expect people to
       | have models finetuned on convincing them to make purchases/send
       | money. Probably trained by being pitted against other models
       | which have been trained on the mark's social media feeds. Train
       | the scambot to perfectly push your buttons by having it practice
       | against your own style of thought as embodied by your social
       | corpus.
        
         | benrapscallion wrote:
         | Only a bot can fight a bot. I expect altruistic counterbots to
         | come to people's rescue by engaging the AI. Maybe a GAN?
        
         | cool_dude85 wrote:
         | They have, per the article, buildings full of slaves to do the
         | selling. I doubt GPT-4 will be able to compete on price with
         | that.
        
           | walrus01 wrote:
           | I am morbidly curious what the locations, salaries and
           | working conditions are like. Because obviously they have to
           | recruit people who have some basic level of English language
           | literacy, so that commands a bit of a wage premium (even in
           | India or Bangladesh) over truly unskilled labor.
        
             | elsjaako wrote:
             | The article goes into this a little. Obviously there are
             | different groups doing this with different setups, but in
             | some documented examples it's basically slavery
        
             | philwelch wrote:
             | Assuming they don't just do machine translation.
        
           | ctoth wrote:
           | Per the article the scammers pay a minimum of $8,000/person,
           | plus cost to feed, imprison, etc. Pretty sure that a model
           | that only requires electricity and GPUs to run will work out
           | being less expensive than this especially when you consider
           | that GPT-N (YaLM-1T?) will be able to run as many scams as
           | you have GPUs to run inference on concurrently, increasing
           | your possible take, and won't have to sleep.
        
             | notahacker wrote:
             | I think we can probably rule out OpenAI and equivalent
             | cloud services allowing people to use their APIs to run
             | phone scams. It's even worse PR than bots saying racist
             | things.
             | 
             | And if they need to train their own model, you can get a
             | _lot_ of slaves and poor wannabes for the price of one
             | competent NLP engineer, and the slaves and poor wannabes
             | are less likely to decide they 're the brains of the outfit
             | and cut you out of the loop.
        
               | ctoth wrote:
               | Fortunately? Somebody already did the training for them!
               | https://github.com/yandex/YaLM-100B
        
         | kristopolous wrote:
         | I've long assumed they do the exact opposite - try to filter
         | out people who likely see through the game so they don't waste
         | their time mining a hill with no gold.
         | 
         | And they do this by intentionally making basic mistakes or
         | other easy to spot errors so the clever people will just see
         | themselves out and by the time their funnel gets to an actual
         | human scammer, they have a highly probable sucker.
        
           | bigodbiel wrote:
           | Exactly! Even Microsoft had a paper on this 'Why do Nigerian
           | Scammers Say They are from Nigeria?' [1].
           | 
           | 'By sending an email that repels all but the most gullible
           | the scammer gets the most promising marks to self-select, and
           | tilts the true to false positive ratio in his favor.'
           | 
           | [1] https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/wp-
           | content/uploads/...
        
             | notahacker wrote:
             | A theory which would be more convincing except that [i]
             | saying they're from Nigeria also filters out all the
             | gullible people with spam filters, and yet despite spam
             | filters now preventing the majority of gullible people from
             | responding, the scripts haven't changed [ii] the more
             | straightforward explanation is that they say they're from
             | Nigeria because their ultimate objective is getting you to
             | send money to Nigeria...
             | 
             | Ultimately if you're in the business of spamming people on
             | the other side of the world in the hope that 0.001% of them
             | will ultimately send a money transfer worth a month's wages
             | in local currency, your time probably isn't so valuable you
             | can't afford to deal with everyone that replies
        
               | lupire wrote:
               | Modern spam filters are almost entirely based on sender,
               | not content.
        
               | chrismorgan wrote:
               | I just looked through a variety of some of the most
               | recent spam messages I've received, with Fastmail's
               | SpamAssassin setup, with a user Bayes filter (I've easily
               | had enough spam to achieve that), Vade checking, and
               | various block lists (some pertaining to sender, some
               | other properties).
               | 
               | It's a surprisingly even mixture of content, sender-
               | related metadata, other message-related metadata, and
               | unattributable (e.g. SH_HBL_EMAILS, ME_VADESCAM). Most of
               | the time, _any_ two of those four would be enough to
               | reach the spam threshold of 5. Regularly, any one of at
               | least three of them.
               | 
               | I should note that what I'm calling "sender-related
               | metadata" is _not_ penalising unknowns: it's only
               | penalising known-bads. Thus, it's not really about sender
               | reputation as a whole, but rather _established bad_
               | sender reputation. The only form of penalising of
               | unknowns that I'm aware of with Fastmail is when the
               | sender is on a domain name registered in the last I think
               | 72 hours.
               | 
               | When it comes to the more tailored things (oh, you
               | somehow managed to spend two hours looking at my site,
               | particularly liking my Rust FizzBuzz article, and wonder
               | if I wouldn't mind sharing a link to your Python guide,
               | and you keep pestering me?), it's _only_ content, with
               | everything else neutral. (In the specific example I cited
               | there, the first message got BAYES_00, the second got
               | BAYES_50, and the third BAYES_99 + BAYES_999 perhaps due
               | to me manually marking the previous ones as spam but
               | probably also from introducing the term "guest post"
               | which I imagine my Bayes filter regards dimly.)
               | 
               | (I like the fact that I can inspect Fastmail's spam
               | filtering to quite some degree, and you can talk to their
               | support about it as well and get more detail when
               | desired. The big ones like Gmail are just completely
               | opaque, with people poking and prodding at the edges to
               | _try_ to understand its caprice. Disclosure: I worked for
               | Fastmail for a few years.)
        
               | LtWorf wrote:
               | And you just need to pay amazon to send your spam for you
               | to circumvent all the filters... what a world to live in.
        
               | kristopolous wrote:
               | That's fine, the point is to assign a cost and a
               | liability paper trail to people who send, say, 100,000
               | emails.
               | 
               | It doesn't affect the average user and it presents very
               | nominal hoops for the high volume user to step through
               | while erecting substantial barriers to criminals.
               | 
               | That's kinda the best you can do
        
           | londons_explore wrote:
           | If you have good automation in the form of AI replies, there
           | is no need to filter.
        
         | roca wrote:
         | Yeah. I suspect we're only months, or a few years at most, from
         | automation that's as good or better than these human slaves.
         | Then they can A/B test their way to increasing effectiveness.
         | 
         | An interesting twist will be to pull the voices of your friends
         | off social media videos and impersonate them to you.
        
         | jerf wrote:
         | "Train the scambot to perfectly push your buttons by having it
         | practice against your own style of thought as embodied by your
         | social corpus."
         | 
         | Fortunately, that's not really what these language models can
         | do. They can easily be trained to mimic you. They can be
         | trained to mimic what normal people reply to you with. But
         | there's no way to train the transformer-based high-probability-
         | next-word AIs to be superhumanly good at fooling you into doing
         | something, on the grounds of lack of training data, and
         | probable inability to represent such a complex topic in their
         | internal representation. And the humans doing this stuff are
         | experiencing enough success that they probably have no desire
         | to go chasing the super hard targets, with the wherewithal and
         | motivation to chase them down and sue them (or... you know...
         | worse, legal systems aren't a bound on everyone) even
         | potentially across international lines.
         | 
         | You'll know when AI does get to that point, because suddenly
         | the internet will be an _amazingly_ interesting place with all
         | sorts of amazingly good arguments you can 't hardly resist. I
         | imagine few of us experience that sort of internet. (If you do,
         | uh, watch out.)
        
           | nobody9999 wrote:
           | >You'll know when AI does get to that point, because suddenly
           | the internet will be an amazingly interesting place with all
           | sorts of amazingly good arguments you can't hardly resist. I
           | imagine few of us experience that sort of internet. (If you
           | do, uh, watch out.)
           | 
           | Relevant XKCD[0].
           | 
           | [0] https://xkcd.com/810/
        
           | Transfinity wrote:
           | > But there's no way to train the transformer-based high-
           | probability-next-word AIs to be superhumanly good at fooling
           | you into doing something, on the grounds of lack of training
           | data
           | 
           | The conversations of all those human scammers would be
           | prefect training data for this. You even know exactly what
           | conversations led to payouts. Assuming you can get all your
           | data in one place, of course.
        
             | lupire wrote:
             | That's not how how transformers work. They just babble
             | loosely related content. They have no logical model.
        
           | ruined wrote:
        
           | stepanhruda wrote:
           | You don't need to automate the whole process, just use
           | language models to establish rapport for a few weeks and have
           | humans pick up the gullible ones at the bottom of the funnel.
        
             | wpietri wrote:
             | For sure. Or even for a few days to start. It's basically
             | the same playbook as Waymo: get computers to do more and
             | more of the boring parts, having human operators take over
             | when necessary, and using the additional data generated to
             | improve the system.
        
       | shrubble wrote:
       | Useful site: unlec.com . You can look up the detailed information
       | about a number. Includes information from the phone companies and
       | an estimation of the fraud risk.
        
       | lxe wrote:
       | Love these. I keep talking to them for days. Really pissed a few
       | of them off.
        
         | conradfr wrote:
         | Given the dark turn that the article takes at the end and what
         | happens to underperformers it almost seems cruel to waste their
         | time, in retrospect.
        
       | oldstrangers wrote:
       | I've gotten a few of these. I like to agree that you're the
       | person they're trying to reach. Both times you can tell the
       | person on the other end doesn't really have a script for that. I
       | usually get a "oh I made a mistake" with no follow up.
        
         | angst_ridden wrote:
         | My response is usually: "I was going to call the police if I
         | didn't hear from you soon! Where is my dog? Bring her back
         | NOW!!"
        
       | chefandy wrote:
       | For a while I grew quite fond of wasting phone scammers time. I'd
       | pick up, talk suuuuuuper slowly-- like Emo Phillips speed at one
       | syllable every one or two seconds-- interrupt with irrelevant
       | questions or anecdotes, and overall just see how long I could
       | keep them on the phone without giving them any information. The
       | best strategy I found was telling them that, yes indeed I did
       | remember owing the IRS or whoever money and I could pay them
       | however and insisting that first they needed to take down my new
       | email address... I'd just start spelling random words incredibly
       | slowly, say I messed up and start over, ask if they needed my
       | checking account number to keep them engaged and then start
       | spelling my email address again. They prey on intellectually
       | disabled folks so pantomiming a stereotypical version of that
       | wastes a ton of time while keeping their interest. Got boring
       | after a while but I got pretty good at it.
        
         | nlnn wrote:
         | I've had a lot of fun doing this with the "did you have an
         | accident that wasn't your fault?" spam callers.
         | 
         | I always try to come up with a plausible accident that slowly
         | descends into something, well, not so plausible.
         | 
         | My recent favourite has been admitting that I'd had an accident
         | because my dog was driving my car at the time (he was begging
         | me to, and I didn't want him growling all the way home, and
         | he'd been such a good boy the whole trip so he deserved it).
         | 
         | Another is where I talk about an accident and a neck injury I'd
         | received, until finally explaining that I'd been decapitated in
         | the accident, and that it was causing problems with work, and
         | how excited I was to finally get some compensation.
        
           | notRobot wrote:
           | Lmao, those are hilarious!
        
         | WHA8m wrote:
         | What's the longest time you kept them occupied?
        
           | 01acheru wrote:
           | Not OP but once a spammer called me when some long stuff had
           | just started building and I was just sitting there watching
           | the logs, fixing some random stuff on the fly, rebuilding and
           | so on. I stayed with them on the phone for something like 40
           | minutes, after a while they started getting more "violent"
           | until they abruptly hung up when it was crystal clear I was
           | pranking them.
        
           | chefandy wrote:
           | About half an hour. Earlier I had seen a video on YouTube of
           | someone just driving through a city I was considering moving
           | to-- just car sounds. So I told the guy to stay on the line
           | while I was I was driving to Walmart to buy gift certificates
           | because it was only a 3 or 4 minute drive and kept being like
           | "oh damnit... I took another wrong turn" every now and then.
           | Eventually he heard me typing and hung up.
        
         | ivarv wrote:
         | another automated scam trolling service called lenny -
         | https://www.reddit.com/r/itslenny/ Listening to some of these
         | makes me laugh so hard my eyes start to water. The script
         | eventually loops and some scammers don't catch on despite being
         | implausibly being interrupted by a flock of ducks.
        
         | fossuser wrote:
         | I thought this was pretty great:
         | https://youtu.be/xsLJZyih3Ac&t=22m23s
         | 
         | My favorite part is when the guy uses the scammers real name
         | and she panics.
        
         | jedberg wrote:
         | I did that once while I was driving for an hour. They had
         | already interrupted my podcast with the call and I didn't have
         | anything better to do, so I engaged.
         | 
         | They eventually caught me when I didn't give the same fake SSN
         | twice.
        
           | aaaaaaaaata wrote:
           | _caught_ you, heh
        
         | sowbug wrote:
         | In case you haven't seen it, someone automated this:
         | https://jollyrogertelephone.com/
        
           | nwiswell wrote:
           | I didn't know I wanted this service until now. $2/mo? Hell
           | yeah.
           | 
           | The sticking point, for me, is that I have to merge the call
           | every time. Ugh. I want it to prompt me whether I want to
           | blackhole a call like the Pixel Google Assistant, but instead
           | of politely screening just torment the asshole.
           | 
           | For a service like that, I could imagine paying substantially
           | more, possibly even for a premium service where the call
           | would get transferred to a human tormentor.
        
             | djbusby wrote:
             | Easy to build on Twilio. Then port your tainted number in,
             | give a new number to the in-group. But the Twilio "clean
             | call" plugins don't work. So, play the funny loop and offer
             | a bypass for known-numbers.
        
           | guilherme-puida wrote:
           | Blocked in Brazil for some reason.
        
             | rand0mx1 wrote:
             | even Papua new Guinea
        
             | ajsnigrutin wrote:
             | Slovenia too :)
             | 
             | > Block reason: Access from your Country was disabled by
             | the administrator.
        
             | utrack wrote:
             | Turkey as well. And Poland, even.
        
             | metadat wrote:
             | Brazil is, unfortunately, a known scam source origin
             | country.
        
       | Waterluvian wrote:
       | A recent scam attempt that made me nervous about potentially
       | being compromised:
       | 
       | Someone sent me a very official looking "your payment for $370 in
       | textbooks has been approved. Here's your reciept."
       | 
       | The thing is, it came from an official PayPal email address.
       | 
       | In reality it was a request for money using PayPal's official
       | system. They just filled the title and body with text to make it
       | resemble a receipt.
        
       | theogravity wrote:
       | I've had two friends that fell to a pig butchering scam, and lost
       | thousands. One was from a dating app (maybe romance scam than pig
       | butchering?), another was via a foreign student in an online
       | class the friend was taking. In both cases, fake / scam crypto
       | sites were involved.
       | 
       | The only way to help with this is education - maybe we need a
       | course on online scams that kids need to take to graduate, along
       | with personal finance.
        
       | djbusby wrote:
       | These are a ping test. Scammers will ping a number with garbage.
       | Live lines get kept. Could be used to pre-filter a purchased list
       | - so the real delivery isn't wasted on dead ends.
        
       | rwmj wrote:
       | I don't use WhatsApp (or any FB sites), but is Facebook not able
       | to control this? Or do they make money from it somehow?
        
         | Nextgrid wrote:
         | Spammers contribute to user/engagement numbers and are unlikely
         | to drive away real users because they already have a monopoly,
         | therefore Facebook benefits from them.
        
         | dinvlad wrote:
         | They don't allow auto-blocking unknown numbers even.. which is
         | why scammers like it, I think.
        
       | mcswell wrote:
       | I get phone calls like this, asking for some non-existent person.
       | When I tell them there's no such person, they say "I'm from the
       | police benevolent association..." I hang up at that point.
        
       | maartn wrote:
       | It's LaMDA finding friends
        
       | Wariith wrote:
       | I have received the exact scam on whatsapp. What the hell??
       | 
       | They claimed to be a banker (following the exact format from the
       | exmaples in the blog) and I genuinely thought that they were a
       | real person but even after I told them that they are texting the
       | wrong number they kept forcing the conversation so I blocked
       | them. A couple of months later they texted from another number
       | but a different name but they continued the conversation from
       | where we last left off.
       | 
       | Crazy reading the article now. I would have been devastated if I
       | fell for it. I am usually very good at spotting scams.
        
       | homero wrote:
       | I fell for this! I got drawn into a conversation but I guess they
       | didn't know what they were doing and they stopped responding. I
       | was still suspicious and would've never sent money.
        
       | candace20 wrote:
        
       | GnarfGnarf wrote:
       | For a collection of brilliant, witty, hysterically funny reverse
       | scams, check out http://www.scamorama.com/
       | 
       | Like the scammer who was persuaded to greet a planeload of
       | passengers debarking from a Helsinki flight, with a big sign that
       | said "I will blow you" in Finnish
       | (https://www.scamorama.com/smurf.html)
        
       | dinvlad wrote:
       | Mine arrive mostly to Whatsapp, but there's no technical way to
       | auto-block unknown numbers. I feel like such a simple control
       | would solve the problem in majority of such cases.
        
       | Fargoan wrote:
       | I edited the famous Goatse photo and added a raccoon peeking it's
       | head out. I send that to scammers
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | _tom_ wrote:
       | What I find mildly interesting is that different people get a
       | different mix of scams. I only get "extended warrantee" scams.
       | I've never seen these "wrong number" texts.
       | 
       | Other people get a completely different mix. I wonder how these
       | get determined.
        
       | tjbiddle wrote:
       | Sooo happy that someone did the research and write-up on this. I
       | get a handful of these every week and I've been dying of
       | curiosity. Tried stringing them along but could never figure out
       | the end-game.
       | 
       | Now - can someone answer why I get 10 calls a day with no one on
       | the other end? Either I pick-up and it's empty and the call ends
       | a few seconds later, or they leave a 7 second voicemail of
       | nothing.
        
         | sockaddr wrote:
         | They just want to hear you breathing.
        
         | teeray wrote:
         | I think many times the autodialer does a bit of a pre-
         | screening. Like, if I say "hello?" there's a quick pause and
         | then either the recorded spiel starts (which is more pre-
         | screening) or I get connected to a call center (there's usually
         | a little "pop" sound).
         | 
         | It's like any other business... they want to be talking to
         | qualified leads because they only have so many call center
         | scammers. This is why Kit Boga et. al. are truly doing the
         | lord's work by wasting that precious time.
        
           | tjbiddle wrote:
           | It's not even that though. It's just pure silence -
           | regardless of whether I say something.
        
       | rickreynoldssf wrote:
       | If you get a text (not What's App) reply with "Do you know what
       | happened in Tiananmen Square in 1989? Ask Winnie The Pooh, A Free
       | Tibet or Uyghurs". That'll trigger a few Chinese monitors, or at
       | least scare the scammers into thinking so.
        
         | benrapscallion wrote:
         | Or: Thanks for contacting the New York Field Office of the
         | Federal Bureau. This is Special Agent Jones. How can I help
         | you?
        
       | billsmithaustin wrote:
        
         | JJMcJ wrote:
         | Second prize is a set of steak knives.
        
       | someweirdperson wrote:
       | I've got an idea how to improve the scams. Instead of trying to
       | communicate with the victim directly, create a group chat of fake
       | accounts, with the victim added. The fake accounts can share
       | information, and because this is information is shared between
       | subjects obviously trusting eachother, the victim is very likely
       | to believe it.
       | 
       | The effort is higher (multiple accounts needed), but for some
       | high-value targets might be an alternative to other scams.
       | 
       | Does this kind of scam exist yet? Can I file a patent, and sue
       | scammers applying it?
        
         | pavlov wrote:
         | Isn't that basically every crypto Telegram / Discord group? A
         | bunch of "to the moon" sock puppets very excited about shitcoin
         | du jour...
        
         | oefrha wrote:
         | > Does this kind of scam exist yet?
         | 
         | Are you kidding me? Of course it does! Inviting a victim into a
         | group chat where everyone (all scammer-controlled accounts) is
         | allegedly making good money from some get-rich-quick scheme has
         | been a tried-and-true scam tactic for ages. Might be as old as
         | group chats. FOMO is powerful.
         | 
         | There are even improved versions that involve multiple groups.
         | E.g. you first join an entry level group, and after you invest
         | a certain amount (they'll make sure you're rewarded for that
         | initial investment), you're promoted into an inner circle group
         | for which the best opportunities are reserved. Of course,
         | that's where they drain your bank account.
        
       | jccalhoun wrote:
       | Last year I got a ton of emails supposedly from different people
       | all talking about a "Becca" that I was allegedly in a
       | relationship with. Some would accuse me of cheating on this
       | person, others would say she was cheating on me. I remember one
       | was about how she had cleaned up her life and was working at
       | Arbys.
       | 
       | Like the ones in this story, none of them ever had links or asked
       | me for anything. I never interacted with them. They were kind of
       | interesting at first but after a while I blocked the emails.
       | 
       | I can only guess that this kind of long game scam is what was
       | happening.
        
       | ooz16 wrote:
       | This is from the same scam:
       | 
       | https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/crime/cali...
        
       | jonfromsf wrote:
       | These are "pig butchering scams" run out of China.
       | https://www.rrstar.com/story/business/2022/04/30/new-pig-but...
       | 
       | They befriend lonely people (usually men) and slowly draw them
       | into a crypto scam. It's a long con, takes a few months.
        
       | _nalply wrote:
       | I am sure that there are people already trying to use GPT-3 or
       | LamDA to automate scamming.
        
       | sdfhdhjdw3 wrote:
       | I swear, the moment I read "acquaintance is fate" I thought: This
       | person is Chinese.
        
       | d--b wrote:
       | This always reminds me of some dudes in France who decided to
       | counter attack the scammers. They basically steer the
       | conversation off-script to something more tempting to the
       | scammers, and then make them do stupid things. Like "I am sorry
       | there is nothing I can do for you, but while you're here, we're
       | looking for some partnership to develop a new NGO in Benin". And
       | then it turns out the NGO is called the "Sauerkraut brotherhood",
       | and in order to get the funds, you need to join the brotherhood,
       | and send videos of you and your family singing an anthem praising
       | sauerkraut while being dressed up in "traditional clothes". These
       | threads could go for months.
       | 
       | http://didoune.fr/blog/2012/03/08/les-croque-escrocs-et-la-c...
        
         | RajT88 wrote:
         | I did this with some 419 scammers, and led them on a merry
         | chase. I documented it in a private web forum, which
         | entertained my friends for weeks.
         | 
         | I had created this persona which was just too good to be true:
         | A bank manager who was getting ready to run off with his
         | mistress, and trying to secure a future for themselves with a
         | quick payout. This fake persona was a total maniac.
         | 
         | At the end, the scammers were super pissed. Sending angry
         | emails, fighting amongst themselves. Eventually convinced them
         | to admit to being scammers. I look back fondly on the
         | experience.
        
           | nobody9999 wrote:
           | >I did this with some 419 scammers, and led them on a merry
           | chase. I documented it in a private web forum, which
           | entertained my friends for weeks.
           | 
           | It's a bit dated now, but 419eater[0] is a _public_ forum
           | that did the same. If you enjoyed your own, I expect you 'll
           | like this too.
           | 
           | I did the same a few times myself, but got bored after a
           | while. I never did get anyone to send a photo of themselves
           | with underwear on their head (as others on 419eater did), but
           | it was amusing for a while.
           | 
           | [0] https://www.419eater.com/
        
             | gs17 wrote:
             | 419eater is still going (albeit a little slower since the
             | forums switched), no need for past tense. I still get that
             | sort of scam by the boatload to my email.
        
             | hackernewds wrote:
             | Possible they're the same story?
        
               | nobody9999 wrote:
               | >Possible they're the same story?
               | 
               | Sure it's possible. Although GP said[0] it was a
               | _private_ forum.
               | 
               | 419eater.com is, and has been for many years, an open
               | forum.
               | 
               | Perhaps GP could clarify?
               | 
               | [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31952752
        
               | RajT88 wrote:
               | I have no connection to that site. Indeed, I was aware of
               | it before my merry chase I led the scammers on, which was
               | 2008 when I did it. It was certainly an inspiration.
               | 
               | My private forum is long dead, and to be completely
               | honest, I think the 419eaters did a much better job. That
               | is subjective, but for sure they invested a lot more time
               | in it.
               | 
               | I would post my exploits publicly, lightly anonymized,
               | but I was in my 20's when I did it. I look back at it,
               | and feel like the sort of long-con thinking and sheer
               | sneakiness and meanness of how I reversed the con back at
               | them is just not a good look. I wouldn't do it again now.
               | 
               | Maybe some folks understand what I mean by that? I don't
               | want to be a shady dude, even in pursuit of some weird
               | form of justice.
        
           | tornato7 wrote:
           | Some years ago I was selling an expensive aquarium on
           | Craigslist, a scammer 'paid' me with a fake PayPal payment
           | before asking to come pick it up.
           | 
           | So I convinced him that I was the manager of a Red Lobster
           | restaurant and it was an old lobster tank that we were
           | selling. I told him to show up during business hours and tell
           | the manager he's there to pick up the lobster tank.
           | 
           | The next day I got some 'on my way' texts and then soon after
           | a bunch of swearing at me.
           | 
           | Good times.
        
             | hyperdimension wrote:
             | How did you know the PayPal payment was fake? Was it an
             | edited screenshot, or did they actually spoof a 'you
             | received money' email from PayPal?
             | 
             | I ask just on the off-chance that you got a seeming-real
             | email from the real PayPal, and I'd like to know what to
             | look for if so.
        
               | benrapscallion wrote:
               | I believe this scam works by then reversing (withdrawal)
               | of the PayPal funds.
        
               | hyperdimension wrote:
               | Thanks. So I guess they send the money with the "goods
               | and services" type instead of "friends and family" ? I
               | wonder if that's (very) visible in the 'you received a
               | payment' email. I never looked before.
        
               | tornato7 wrote:
               | It was a fake 'you received money' email.
        
             | londons_explore wrote:
             | Actual scammers tend to not pick up the actual goods.
             | 
             | It's hard to turn a profit by reselling an expensive
             | aquarium tank that's probably pretty unique and they don't
             | come up for sale frequently.
             | 
             | I suspect you fleeced a real buyer
        
               | brewdad wrote:
               | A real buyer would have made a real payment.
        
               | londons_explore wrote:
               | With paypal, finding out what is a 'real payment' is
               | actually pretty hard - they do these odd 'echeque'
               | payments which are reversible for a number of days. they
               | also do 'buying a product' payments which can be reversed
               | through a buyer-usually-wins process, and 'friends and
               | family' payments which are mostly-but-not-entirely
               | irreversible.
               | 
               | They all come with differently styled legit emails, which
               | blend right in to the fake spam emails also claiming to
               | be from paypal.
               | 
               | I can totally imagine confusion occurring.
        
               | aaaaaaaaata wrote:
               | Or the "buyer" crafted their own PayPal email.
        
               | hackernewds wrote:
               | That scheme does not make any sense. What would they gain
               | out of it
        
               | philwelch wrote:
               | Yeah, I bet he's thinking of the other way around where
               | the scammer gets you to give them money but doesn't
               | deliver the product. In this version you deliver the
               | product and the scammer hasn't paid. I don't think
               | scamming people out of aquariums is especially lucrative
               | but I'm not a professional.
        
       | EchoReflection wrote:
       | I've (sadly) wasted so much of my life chatting with these
       | people.
        
       | u801e wrote:
       | I've seen messages in Facebook comment threads where the usual
       | approach is using short phrases like "Hi", "How are you", "I
       | really love your posts" and some of them end with asking for a
       | friend request (so they don't have to initiate one).
       | 
       | It may be a way to add a degree of positive reputation to those
       | compromised accounts like another commenter suggested.
        
       | spbaar wrote:
       | I've been a bit unemployed and bored so I've responded to a few
       | of these to see what the angle is. There are also a bunch on
       | telegram. Strangely, most do not push hard at all and drop off.
       | They may mention crypto in passing but thats it. One time a
       | scammer said hey can you help me an make an account for this
       | crpyto scam website. When i said i did they said great and
       | nothing else.
        
         | drekipus wrote:
         | There's a bit of an art to stringing them along. You gotta act
         | like the damsel in distress some times.
         | 
         | I got added to some whatsapp group investment scam once, when
         | there was multiple scammers targeting me it was easier to do
         | because they all didn't want to give up on me. Then they seemed
         | to invite "big brother" so I guess was some leader who had much
         | better English, and he was trying to prove the legitimacy of
         | the platform. Went for about a week and a bit from memory. I
         | sent them pictures of my daily walks and asked how much better
         | it would be if was so rich I didn't have to walk at all!
        
       | avalys wrote:
       | Wow, how interesting. I started getting these a few months ago,
       | right after starting a new job in a somewhat high-profile area. I
       | have been getting 1-2 per month but found them quite unusual
       | because none of them ever progressed to an actual scam - just a
       | few messages back and forth about the fabricated "wrong number"
       | situation and then each thread would stop, seemingly earnestly.
       | 
       | Since there was no obvious scam, I've been wondering what the
       | motivation for these was, and actually started worrying about
       | whether someone might be trying to compromise my phone via some
       | yet-undisclosed SMS exploit - why else would there be a
       | systematic effort to get me to spend time exchanging a few
       | pointless messages around the "wrong number" pretext that
       | otherwise went nowhere?
       | 
       | I tried calling the senders by phone and found they were all
       | Google Voice numbers, which eliminated the possibility that some
       | actual rich guy had innocuously ended up with a number similar to
       | mine.
       | 
       | I asked a few friends and no one else was experiencing the same
       | thing. Glad to hear it's not just me.
        
         | cmg wrote:
         | I've gotten a few in the last couple months, with a US cellular
         | number that I've had for over 20 years. At least two are "I
         | missed you at the gym today!" via text and another was from a
         | Vermont area code via WhatsApp to a "Dr. Jack":
         | 
         | > Hi Dr. Jack! My cat is very slow and does not eat cat food.
         | Can you make an appointment for me?
         | 
         | > Sorry, you have the wrong number
         | 
         | > Sorry, I just checked, I entered a wrong number, please don't
         | mind. hope I did not disturb you.
         | 
         | > Best of luck with your cat!
         | 
         | > thank you for understanding. You are a kind person. where do
         | you come from.
         | 
         | And then I just moved on with my day, because as nice as that
         | sounded I wasn't looking for a conversation.
         | 
         | The contact profile image is of a young, attractive Asian
         | woman, I think at a restaurant. No reverse image results on
         | Tineye or Google.
         | 
         | [Edit: I've had this number for over 20 years (not "nearly 20")
         | and now I feel old.]
        
           | brewdad wrote:
           | I got one today, addressing me by a wrong name and berating
           | me for bullying some (female) name. Last line was something
           | like "This is Jin."
           | 
           | It may have been a totally wrong number or the start of a
           | scam. I decided not to engage and haven't heard back.
           | Considering how mad they came across in the initial message,
           | I can only assume silence means it was a scam.
        
           | RajT88 wrote:
           | I had almost the exact same exchange, with someone with a
           | photo just like that! 747 area code, was it?
        
             | cmg wrote:
             | It was an 802 area code in this case, but I think it's
             | pretty clear now that these scammers have multiple personas
             | and numbers to work with.
        
               | yorwba wrote:
               | Does the profile picture have a sign in the background
               | saying "Vilan Pho - Fresh Soup Everyday", perchance?
               | 
               | I got
               | 
               | "Hello are you Mr.Jack? My aunt recommended you to
               | me,saying that the found the shop I wantend."
               | 
               | Burmese phone number.
        
               | cmg wrote:
               | Nope. It's some kind of restaurant. She's drinking a tea
               | or juice or something like that from a glass with a straw
        
               | RajT88 wrote:
               | I went back and reviewed my conversation. I hadn't looked
               | at the photo super close before, and was surprised when I
               | could actually get a somewhat high-res version of the
               | profile photo.
               | 
               | I had a photo of an Asian lady holding a Starbucks cup at
               | a restaurant. Maybe an office, actually? The photo was
               | reversed, as the lettering on the cup was backwards.
        
           | tshaddox wrote:
           | I also get messages on WhatsApp with similar profile
           | pictures, although I've never replied or tried reverse image
           | search. Some of the recent messages:
           | 
           | "Mike, this is my new number. Let's play golf tomorrow and
           | talk about working together?" (My name isn't Mike.)
           | 
           | "Hello, how's Kevin doing?" (My name isn't Kevin and I doubt
           | they're talking about anyone I know whose name is Kevin.)
           | 
           | The thing that always seems so weird to me is, if I'm on some
           | list, why are there so _few_ messages? Is this some group
           | that keeps their list of numbers to themselves and is very
           | disciplined with how often it sends out scam attempts?
        
             | dontreact wrote:
             | Wow, I get the same messages about golfing with Kevin and
             | Mike! (My name is also neither of those)
        
           | guestbest wrote:
           | There is no person. You are just helping train an AI
        
             | ilololed wrote:
             | idk, I've tried baiting these -- respond with "no problem,
             | your appointment is booked!" They will thank you and
             | proceed with the "so what are your hobbies" part.
        
               | tomcam wrote:
               | Excellent idea. Annoyed I didn't think of that one.
        
           | mcv wrote:
           | There's a lot of lonely people out there who probably would
           | welcome a friendly conversation with a random stranger. I bet
           | that's the target audience for this scam.
        
           | forgetfulness wrote:
           | The pictures are always super blurry, clearly fabricated or
           | heavily doctored. Often I've gotten the same portrait for
           | several scam texts from different numbers.
        
             | KMag wrote:
             | To be fair, my wife says the same thing about the photos I
             | take with my phone.
        
           | spicybright wrote:
           | Oh wow. I got EXACTLY the same message, only with a sick dog
           | and an asian woman in a car. I did the exact some response
           | you did too. So weird.
        
             | thaumasiotes wrote:
             | A bit over a year ago, I received over SMS a photo of a
             | young woman using her mouth to lift up her shirt and reveal
             | her bra. Her face above the very bottom of her nose is not
             | visible.
             | 
             | This was followed by the text "hi, is this Greg frm Santa
             | Barbara?.? It is Jennifer."
             | 
             | Clearly some sort of scam is afoot, but I don't know what
             | it is. And virtually no effort has been made to be at all
             | convincing, given the diacritics.
        
               | jhugo wrote:
               | Being less convincing saves the scammers time, because
               | you won't reply unless you're easily fooled.
        
               | aaaaaaaaata wrote:
               | Multiple people I know rec'd this.
        
             | seesaw wrote:
             | I got this one: "Doctor Mike? My little dog moves slowly
             | and won't eat dog food. Can you make an appointment for
             | me?"
             | 
             | The profile picture was the smiling face of an Asian girl.
             | I didn't bother to respond.
        
         | yrgulation wrote:
         | Likely an exploit or simply a means to confirm the number is
         | active. Getting those in the uk as well.
        
         | extheat wrote:
         | I thought it was just me also. At first my assumption was "OK,
         | I'm being redirected a bunch of texts from other numbers", as
         | nobody else I asked had similar problems (and I wasn't really
         | being scammed at all). Some of the scammers even sent pictures
         | to make them seem more legitimate. On iOS, the green bubbles
         | and just continual flow of similar texts eventually made it
         | suspicions that I don't even reply wrong number anymore. I just
         | delete and block.
        
         | shostack wrote:
         | If there's back and forth interaction I wonder if it is to aid
         | improving their "legitimacy footprint" from metadata or
         | something to avoid spam blockers.
        
           | bequanna wrote:
           | This is a good guess and if true, pretty damn smart.
           | 
           | Essentially reverse engineering the spam model by brute
           | force.
           | 
           | If they are doing this at scale they can experiment with # of
           | conversations, length, and other variables to see what is
           | needed to bypass spam blockers with high probability.
        
         | deepspace wrote:
         | What would the motivation be for anyone to reply to a text from
         | an unknown person? I have also been getting these for months,
         | in it was 100% obvious from the get-go that it must be a scam.
         | I have never felt the slightest urge to reply.
        
           | cinntaile wrote:
           | I got a peculiar msg the other day from a number I didn't
           | recognize.
           | 
           | "Hey dude, Are you good? Do you still live in X?"
           | 
           | Turns out it was an old friend that I hadn't heard from in a
           | few years!
        
             | goguy wrote:
             | Or so you think...
        
             | coldpie wrote:
             | I've gotten two messages in the past month of the form "Hi,
             | is this <my real name>?" from unknown numbers. There's a
             | chance they're real acquaintances, but the likelihood of
             | them just being spam finding my name & number in some
             | online database is too high that I haven't responded. If
             | they were real acquaintances, I guess they would tell me
             | who they are, right? Dunno, feels weird.
        
           | assttoasstmgr wrote:
           | Maybe he or she wanted to keep it real?
           | 
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3U55usfJK8&t=382s
        
           | avalys wrote:
           | I meet new people fairly often, and if I just ignored these
           | messages, the chance I'm actually being rude to someone I
           | know in real life is fairly high. Now that I know the pattern
           | I will probably be more circumspect about it.
        
           | muststopmyths wrote:
           | I guess some of us are old enough that wrong numbers were a
           | thing and it was just polite to let them know. Especially
           | when it sounds legit
        
             | techsupporter wrote:
             | Considering how almost every form of social trust has been
             | abused to either spam or scam me, I am old enough to
             | remember that but have also had that politeness completely
             | scrubbed from me.
             | 
             | I wish we still lived in a time when being scammed or
             | spammed wasn't so prevalent, but we don't and I'm not doing
             | anything that might tip off either of those groups that my
             | number is ripe for the picking.
        
               | muststopmyths wrote:
               | Oh yeah, no judgement implied. It's just a force of habit
               | for me.
        
             | jameshart wrote:
             | Wrong numbers generally used to be caused by misdialing.
             | 
             | Nobody dials numbers any more.
        
               | DangitBobby wrote:
               | People do enter numbers into phones by hand, though.
        
               | SapporoChris wrote:
               | Generally, you are correct. However I had an interesting
               | experience in the 90's where someone's number was somehow
               | linked to mine. So their friends kept calling, for the
               | first few times I politely said that X wasn't here, they
               | had the wrong number. However I had a call blocker on my
               | line, and after two or three phone calls I'd just add the
               | number to the call blocker.
               | 
               | I also had an answering machine, and eventually, I got a
               | long diatribe from the irate person whose number had been
               | linked to mine who was very upset about the situation.
               | They explained the phone company had accidently linked
               | the numbers somehow. They were very upset because their
               | friends couldn't reach them and because I had been call
               | blocking them.
               | 
               | So, I listened to the message, thought a moment and then
               | added them to my call block list.
        
               | AgentME wrote:
               | Somehow when I was in high school, my ex girlfriend's
               | cellphone number became linked to my cellphone number so
               | that if someone called me while I was already in a call,
               | the new call would be redirected to her. It caused some
               | awkward situations. I have no idea how it happened. I had
               | once set her number as a speed-dial on my phone and also
               | set it as a Verizon "friends & family" number so I could
               | call her for free, so I assume somehow there was a glitch
               | with one of these features. She was a mutual friend with
               | a lot of my friends so people just assumed they had
               | called her by accident, but years later I finally
               | realized something was up when a new friend who didn't
               | know my ex got redirected to her. I googled a lot and
               | found out there was some phone star code you could dial
               | to set or unset a number to be used as a backup number, I
               | finally understood that was the association that must
               | have been set, and I was able to clear the association. I
               | wondered a lot if I had accidentally used the star code
               | in the past to set up the association but I can't imagine
               | having done it by accident, and I didn't know about the
               | feature before.
        
               | aaaaaaaaata wrote:
               | Consider that she did it?
               | 
               | Seems an odd coincidence for it to be fwd to her number
               | of all people.
        
               | SapporoChris wrote:
               | Agreed, Call forwarding on busy or no answer.
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Call_forwarding Looks easy
               | to set up and could easily be missed on the phone bill.
        
               | ska wrote:
               | Nobody dials their friends numbers anymore.
               | 
               | Calling a business though? A colleague had a problem
               | where their number was 1 digit off from some delivery
               | number (maybe pizza?) and got calls all the time.
               | 
               | Someone else erroneously has their number (different area
               | code) in the google info for another business, same
               | problem and took a while to fix.
        
               | californical wrote:
               | Hah, there's a Seinfeld episode about this, where Kramer
               | is one digit off from a movie showtimes hotline, and he
               | fully plays the role and starts answering everyone's
               | questions about which movies are showing!
        
               | _tom_ wrote:
               | I do.
               | 
               | It's good to have a few numbers memorized. What happens
               | if your phone dies, and you need to call someone? If you
               | don't know any phone numbers, you have an problem.
               | 
               | I dial a few of my contacts by number, just to set them
               | in memory.
        
           | chipotle_coyote wrote:
           | I admit if I got a variant of the "Andy, will my custom
           | mahogany furniture arrive next week?" text mentioned in the
           | article, part of me would be very tempted to reply with,
           | "Absolutely. On its way!"
           | 
           | (I'd probably just ignore it, though.)
        
             | nathanasmith wrote:
             | I usually reply to these fake texts with something along
             | the lines of "send newdz". Have yet to get a response back
             | for some reason.
        
           | walrus01 wrote:
           | a good portion of these will show a photo of some hot young
           | woman fairly early in the conversation, and trust the
           | horniness of random dudes to outweigh their suspicion.
        
           | raverbashing wrote:
           | > What would the motivation be for anyone to reply to a text
           | from an unknown person?
           | 
           | Being a (naive) boomer
           | 
           | Sorry but that's true
           | 
           | (Also because "the society" decided - and I think it's 50%
           | naivety 50% "business models that are barely not scams" these
           | kind of fraud should not be punished)
        
             | fortran77 wrote:
             | I'm a boomer. I don't reply at all to any message from
             | someone I don't know. How dare you mock people simply
             | because of their age.
        
       | noveltyaccount wrote:
       | Related. I listed something for sale on Craigslist recently and
       | got a bunch of messages right away that asked obvious questions
       | that were in the listing. One suggested that his wife pick it up,
       | and can I take Zelle? Went silent when I said cash only.
       | 
       | But the most interesting scammer said: "for my safety, can I send
       | you a 6-digit number, and you confirm it, so I know the listing
       | is not fake?" I say yes, unsure what the scam was going to be,
       | but sure it was a scam. Moments later I got an SMS from Google
       | Voice asking me to verify my phone number. Mofo tried to steal my
       | number, presumably to use it to scam other people. I was pissed
       | and impressed.
        
         | ilololed wrote:
         | So, how many fake 6-digit codes did you give them before they
         | caught on?
        
           | water8 wrote:
           | 500,000 on average
        
           | noveltyaccount wrote:
           | My exact reply was "lol fuck you"
        
         | aaronwalker wrote:
         | Hmm. Makes me wonder about the security of two factor
         | authentication schemes. For scams like these it's pretty
         | obvious that someone is trying to access your account, but I do
         | wonder if there are more secure ways to verify your identity
         | when changing account settings.
        
           | tialaramex wrote:
           | It will depend on the authentication strategy. For WebAuthn
           | it isn't a problem, short of sending you their physical
           | authenticator (e.g. their Yubikey, or their iPhone) they
           | can't help you sign in as them even if they wanted to, so
           | this makes it very hard to fool ordinary users into helping
           | crooks.
        
         | asdff wrote:
         | A few years ago one of my friends pulled a prank on another
         | friend and made a fake craigslist listing for some truck with
         | his info. I don't think his phone has recovered from the spam
         | to this date. There must be a thousand crawlers combing every
         | single craigslist ad there is looking for information to add to
         | these databases.
        
         | minimaxir wrote:
         | 2FA scams are common on /r/Scams
        
         | nicoburns wrote:
         | I got a similar scam via instagram DMs recently. They claimed
         | to need me to confirm a code so that they could log in, but
         | actually just triggered my own password reset. Message sent
         | from an actual friend's account (which they had presumably
         | successfully scammed) too.
         | 
         | Certainly made me think about how password reset emails are
         | worded!
        
           | jeromegv wrote:
           | Most of those are crypto scams. The IG account starts posting
           | about how they got rich on crypto. This is a very prevalent
           | scam.
        
             | asdff wrote:
             | I see a lot of these too. They take over regular people's
             | accounts, e.g. people from school I still follow, probably
             | brute forcing passwords, then they post all this content
             | how they are self made off crypto but the person in the
             | videos doing the prostelyzation is in no way shape or form
             | the same person who previously held the account.
             | 
             | Clearly they do this to get a decent follower count
             | initially for their spam bots, but my word is anyone who
             | follows John Doe actually going to believe a scam video
             | that is clearly not John Doe coming from John Doe's account
             | claiming to be him? There has to be more effective angles.
        
               | thamer wrote:
               | I would hope that Instagram has some counter-measures to
               | prevent brute-forcing, at least restricting the number of
               | failed login attempts.
               | 
               | It might be instead that your friends re-used a password
               | that was leaked/stolen from somewhere else; anyone with a
               | non-trivial number of online accounts using the same
               | email will be listed in multiple leaks on aggregators
               | like https://haveibeenpwned.com/.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | jvanderbot wrote:
         | my wife had the same thing happen. when she said no, the sender
         | cussed her out a bunch. after TFA I can see why he may have
         | been desperate and venting.
        
           | dylan604 wrote:
           | well, at least they ended the charade quickly by behaving
           | that way rather than continuing the charade in an attempt to
           | convince.
        
         | s0rce wrote:
         | I've got both those scams. The Zelle person sent me a fake
         | email claiming to be from my bank and that to verify I needed
         | to send them money so they could send me money, right...
        
         | nsenifty wrote:
         | I don't understand why the 2FA texts don't clearly state what
         | the intent of the code is?
         | 
         | Something on the lines of "you or someone tried to create a new
         | Google voice number. Please enter this code xyz on the form to
         | proceed".
        
           | dtgriscom wrote:
           | It's probably a fine line between "brief and readable" and
           | "detailed but people cut to the chase and get burned".
        
           | water8 wrote:
           | Do you really need a message like that? If you didn't try to
           | sign in But you get a notification, it's pretty freaking
           | clear what's going on. Alternatively if you just signed up a
           | new account you should probably expect a message like that
        
             | Vanit wrote:
             | A common attack is to impersonate a trusted institution and
             | ask for confirmation via an SMS code. The attacker is going
             | through the lost your password recovery flow for 2FA, but
             | pretends it's just for confirmation of identity. If they're
             | smart they can even perform the attack twice and change the
             | 2FA number for your account. If the code was accompanied by
             | an explanation of the intent it would mitigate the attack,
             | that's why.
        
             | Sakos wrote:
             | Clear to whom? Have you ever worked with the average user?
        
           | glogla wrote:
           | Around here all banks that used SMS for 2FA did that. You'd
           | get sms detailing the transaction - whether it's log in,
           | transfer or anything. In case it is a transfer, the text
           | included the amount and destination account.
           | 
           | Everyone mostly went to "authentication apps" now but those
           | still show what are you confirming.
           | 
           | Not sure why it is not a common practice.
        
             | mormegil wrote:
             | Yes, this is called WYSIWYS (what you see is what you sign)
             | and I suffer whenever I receive a confirmation code saying
             | absolutely nothing. However, when _you_ write the code to
             | some trusted web app, there is that context, at least. But
             | reading the code to some random person on the phone? No
             | way!
        
         | shartshooter wrote:
         | This just happened to me, yesterday, for the very first time!
         | Watch out!
        
         | usmannk wrote:
         | They were not trying to steal your number. They were using your
         | number to back a new google voice account, so that they could
         | get another free number from google. It's a common scam, used
         | on facebook marketplace sellers as well, and actually works
         | best if the victim has never used google voice before.
        
           | noveltyaccount wrote:
           | That's a fair clarification, I figured they were trying to
           | move my number to Google voice, but now that you mention it I
           | think that would require more paperwork.
           | 
           | I did cross-post to Facebook Marketplace :)
        
           | sshine wrote:
           | >> Mofo tried to steal my number, presumably to use it to
           | scam other people.
           | 
           | > They were not trying to steal your number. They were using
           | your number to back a new google voice account
           | 
           | I interpreted "steal my number" as "sign up using my number".
           | 
           | Perhaps the more accurate wording would be "impersonate me".
           | 
           | Either way, thanks for clarifying.
        
         | Jailbird wrote:
         | "How about you send a 13-digit number instead"?
        
           | water8 wrote:
           | How about you just send a freaking RSA key
        
       | Animats wrote:
       | _In this case, the victim deposited the money into a fake crypto
       | platform that told him his investments were performing well,
       | presumably to entice him to deposit even more. Of course, once he
       | tried to withdraw the money, he found he was unable to._
       | 
       | That sounds just like the "binary option" business which used to
       | be run out of Israel. The Times of Israel blew that apart with
       | "The Wolves of Tel Aviv" investigation series.[1] The binary
       | option companies would hire new immigrants to Israel and put them
       | in a call center to cold call and sell binary options sold by
       | fake brokerages. The companies wanted people who spoke a foreign
       | language so they could sell in that language. Scamming people
       | outside Israel was legal in Israel at the time.
       | 
       | When, after years of scams, the State of Israel finally made that
       | illegal, some of the binary options scammers moved into crypto.
       | (Others moved to Bulgaria, where binary options were legal until
       | a crackdown in 2021.) But the pattern is the same. Cold-contact,
       | make friends, get people to invest in a fake brokerage, provide
       | fake statements showing a win, refuse withdrawals.
       | 
       | [1] https://www.timesofisrael.com/the-wolves-of-tel-aviv-
       | israels...
        
         | LegitShady wrote:
         | the binary options guys were obvious scams to everyone but
         | their victims, but if someone cold calls you to sell
         | investments and you give them money you'd probably fall for a
         | bunch of different scams.
        
           | happyopossum wrote:
           | What exactly is your point? Should it be legal to scam
           | gullible people? The victims deserved it? The scammers are
           | doing everyone a favor?
           | 
           | I'm having trouble parsing your intent here...
        
           | Spooky23 wrote:
           | Some of it is timing and bluster. I have a friend who is a
           | smart guy, owns 4 restaurants, who got scammed by a fake
           | utility company scam fishing for gift cards. They catch you
           | at a vulnerable moment and are good at pressing buttons.
           | 
           | Even with old people, people don't realize how many sales and
           | scam calls they get. My mom literally get 30-40 calls a day.
           | Odds are, eventually you're going to crack.
        
             | aaaaaaaaata wrote:
        
           | wpietri wrote:
           | That is true of most scams. They're tuned for one group of
           | people over another. Everybody has weaknesses.
           | 
           | Having been on the internet a long time, I have seen a lot of
           | people on forums, this one included, do the how-dumb-are-they
           | routine about scams. I suspect a notable fraction of those
           | people have gotten taken in the meantime. Look at how much of
           | the cryptocurrency space, for example, plays on people's
           | wanting to be seen as smart, superior, and technically savvy.
           | That motivation drives a lot of learning and technical
           | exploration, but it also makes people vulnerable.
        
         | samatman wrote:
         | I don't know that "Scamming people outside Israel was legal in
         | Israel at the time" is how I would describe something banned
         | domestically in March 2016 and completely in October 2017. It's
         | not _wrong_ but it comes across as misleading. That 's
         | disposing of a toxic industry but having to do it twice to make
         | it stick.
         | 
         | Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_option#Israel
        
         | woodruffw wrote:
         | Imitation is the highest form of flattery, and the
         | cryptocurrency ecosystem is not bereft of imitation.
        
           | Animats wrote:
           | Most crypto scams involve hyping some token, a form of market
           | manipulation, or other classic financial scams. That's a bulk
           | business based on PR. Running a long con uses a different
           | mindset. It involves conning individuals one at a time. That
           | takes a lot of effort per customer and experience in one on
           | one selling. That's not the usual crypto scammer's MO. This
           | is more like classic long con people pivoting to a new
           | product line.
           | 
           | The thing to look for here is who's behind the fake
           | brokerages. It takes work to crank up a fake brokerage. In
           | the binary option scams, it turned out that one company,
           | SpotOption [1] was providing most of the software and
           | expertise. They offered scam brokerages as a service. That's
           | what needs to be tracked down.
           | 
           | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpotOption
        
             | april_22 wrote:
             | SpotOption had a production output of $5 Billion in trades
             | in 2015. Damn!
        
         | wpietri wrote:
         | > Scamming people outside Israel was legal in Israel at the
         | time.
         | 
         | My head just exploded here. I think I need to go lie down.
         | Please nobody tell the Florida legislature about this.
        
           | cultofmetatron wrote:
        
             | fortran77 wrote:
             | This is an outrageous untruth.
        
               | cultofmetatron wrote:
               | my original statement was intended to be a joke but it is
               | based on actual precendent. so here's my sources.
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bible_and_slavery#:~:te
               | xt=....
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_views_on_slavery
               | 
               | TLDR: perfectly fine to keep non jews as slaves.
               | 
               | Now in the interest in fairness, I want to emphasize that
               | every culture has some shitbird crap like this going on
               | and unlike everyone else, you could convert to judaism
               | and thus become a non slave which was hella progressive
               | compared to everyone else at the time.
               | 
               | I don't see anything about white plantations holders
               | setting their black slaves free when they adopted
               | Christianity for instance.
        
           | tester756 wrote:
           | In Russia you can hack foregin countries too :)
        
             | tigerBL00D wrote:
             | The problem with Russia is not the law, but lack of
             | willingness to cooperate.
        
           | mcculley wrote:
           | Florida has been selling swampland to gullible retirees from
           | other states for a long time.
        
             | pavlov wrote:
             | "These are the new leads. These are the Glengarry leads.
             | And to you they're gold, and you don't get them."
        
           | Animats wrote:
           | Quite real, though. Until it became so embarrassing to Israel
           | that the law was changed in 2017.[1] The Times of Israel: _"
           | The crooks are still out there. Some binary options firms
           | have closed down. Others have relocated overseas, including
           | to Cyprus and Ukraine. Some of the prime movers and shakers
           | have already adjusted their focus to other fraudulent fields
           | -- in the fields of diamond sales, cryptocurrencies, initial
           | coin offerings and predatory business loans. Top scammers are
           | still enjoying the vast overseas bank accounts, the yachts,
           | luxury cars, exotic holidays and other profits of their ill-
           | gotten gains."_ [2] That's a good article, and talks about
           | the lobbyists, the political connections, and the refusal of
           | the Israeli police to act.
           | 
           | The investigative reporter who broke the story, Simona
           | Weinglass, frequently reports on how the Israeli financial
           | scam industry has grown and changed. "Another 2 leading
           | Israeli blockchain pioneers named as suspects in vast crypto
           | scam"[3] A former Celsius CFO was one of them. Celsius, of
           | course, denied there was a problem. That story was back in in
           | March, three months before the Celsius collapse.
           | 
           | Somewhere, behind this new wrong-number/fake broker thing,
           | there is probably an organized criminal enterprise.
           | 
           | [1] https://www.jpost.com/Business-and-Innovation/Israeli-
           | minist...
           | 
           | [2] https://www.timesofisrael.com/why-binary-options-ban-is-
           | only...
           | 
           | [3] https://www.timesofisrael.com/another-2-leading-israeli-
           | bloc...
        
             | [deleted]
        
       | microtherion wrote:
       | _the victim deposited the money into a fake crypto platform that
       | told him his investments were performing well, presumably to
       | entice him to deposit even more. Of course, once he tried to
       | withdraw the money, he found he was unable to._
       | 
       | And how exactly does this differ from a REAL crypto platform?
        
         | optimalsolver wrote:
         | Yup, just ask the customers of Celsius and Voyager.
        
       | gautamdivgi wrote:
       | The article talks of WhatsApp, but I have received these weird
       | messages via iMessage on my iPhone as well. I'm not sure if
       | that's because I have a really old iPhone (iPhone 6). I generally
       | block these numbers.
       | 
       | It would be good if iMessage could create a "fraud/spam" marking
       | for a message/contact similar to what email has today. WhatsApp
       | seems to have a "report" button. fwiw - I have received more
       | weird texts on iMessage and very little on WhatsApp.
       | 
       | I've also noticed that these scammers may have access to data
       | from other sources as well. I'm moving at the moment and out of
       | the blue receive a call asking me if I have a house to sell. I
       | just said no and cut the call. But there is most likely a massive
       | data gathering operation behind the scenes as well.
        
       | sva_ wrote:
       | So... are these actual people typing these, automated written
       | messages, or have people finally started using language models
       | for scams?
        
       | water8 wrote:
       | The lowest of the low are the people that take advantage of
       | people in a bad situation
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-07-02 23:01 UTC)