Spam Levels on the Rise, Again

With the shutdown of McColo by Internet Service Providers in November, global spam volumes dropped over 50 percent. Sadly, this appears to have been a short-term fix. According to a new Symantec report, the spammers have moved to new locations and the volumes are back up to 80 percent of pre-McColo levels.

While spam originates from a lot of places, the United States is still in the number one spot, with 27 percent of the spam observed originating from there. China and Brazil tied for second place with 7 percent of spam originating from these countries.

The report indicates that URLs in Canadian Pharmacy spam messages were noted as being top-level Chinese domains (.cn TLD). Could this mean that Chinese knock-off (counterfeit) prescriptions are trying to make it appear as if they are coming from Canada? Given the recent concerns of tainted and poisonous merchandise being exported from China, this might be a concern. Of course, I would think that buying prescription meds over the Internet should be a concern to most people, anyway.

In another variation of recently observed spam, a user is invited to join a social networking site. The link goes to a real group, which was created on the social networking site by the spammer. The group then links to a free blogging site, which redirects the victim to the ultimate destination URL. At the destination URL, personal information is requested, which is probably used to sell to marketing companies or used in other spam campaigns. Please note, although not mentioned in the report, that some of these campaigns might have malicious intent or be scams.

Also noted during the holiday season was a lot of e-Card spam. This spam sometimes comes with malware (malicious software) designed to steal personal and financial information or turn your machine in to a spam spewing zombie computer using your credentials.

A partcularly deceptive spam delivery method noted recently is spammers inserting their messages into legitimate newsletters. This method seems to get past spam filters pretty effectively. If the recipient clicks on the message, they are taken to a spammer site. Here again, it might be a site selling junk, but also could be a site with more malicious intent.

Another spam trend in vogue these days is to use the recession as a social engineering lure designed to get people to click on a spam link. Messages are being sent out in the millions touting easy bail-out money to be had and an assortment of the normal get-rich- quick schemes. If it's too good to be true and doesn't make sense, it's normally a scam, and I suspect that most of this type of spam is one.

Last but not least, the spammers are still using President-elect Barack Obama's name to market coin offers, a "Barackumentary DVD" and a free Visa card for helping the Obama clan pick their dog.

Shutting down McColo by reaching out to the ISPs — which was done largely through the work of Brian Krebs at Security Fix (Washington Post) -- showed that a significant impact can be made on spam when ISPs are held accountable. Given that Brian is one person and a journalist, this was an admirable piece of work. The fact that spam is approaching pre-McColo levels tells us that there are more ISPs that need to be held accountable. Maybe in the end, government and international agencies need to follow Brian's example and and make an impact on spam levels that will last a little longer.

Spam is a dangerous pain for everyone who uses e-mail. Most scams, questionable goods and services and cyber-attacks using malicious software start with a spam e-mail. Shutting down the spam operators can only make everyone's experience on the Internet a little more safe and sane.

New IRS rules dictate stricter controls on how personal information is marketed by preparers!

Last year, a large amount of fraud cases were reported when people claimed refund anticipation loans using fraudulent information.

In many instances, these fraudulent returns were filed using the earned income tax credit. The earned income tax credit returns a portion, or all of the taxes people pay, who are below a certain income level when they file their yearly tax return.

While an honorable practice in principle, the credit is targeted by fraudsters, who submit fake W-2 information and claim large refunds that they were not entitled to.

W-2's can be purchased in just about any office supply store, or even over the Internet.

Another growing trend noted -- with all the stolen identities and counterfeit identification out there -- are fraudulent tax returns being filed using other people's information. RAL refunds can net several thousand dollars each, which make them prime targets for financial fraud.

Low income people are also often recruited to go in and get these loans using "made up" information.

Guess who ends up getting caught if the IRS discovers the fraud in most instances? I'll give you a hint, it probably won't be the person who talked them into doing it.

I'm not sure if all the tax refund fraud and reported identity theft last year inspired the recently announced IRS rules, but it's probably a good guess that it had something to do with it.

The IRS is now giving taxpayers more control over their personal and financial information. They are also examining whether certain restrictions should be placed on refund anticipation loans.

The IRS press release states:

Federal law already strictly prohibits the IRS from making disclosures of taxpayer return information within its control to third parties except with taxpayer consent or in circumstances set by Congress. The final rules have no effect on the strict protection of return information in the IRS’s hands and apply only to tax return information held by income tax return preparers.

Among the new rules:

Generally, preparers must obtain taxpayer consent, either by paper or electronically depending on how the return is being filed, before tax return information can be disclosed to any third party or used for any purpose other than filing the return.

If the taxpayer consents to the disclosure and use of his information, the consent must identify the intended purpose of the disclosure, identify the recipients and describe the particular authorized disclosure or use of the information.

Mandatory language informs individual taxpayers that they are not required to sign the consent; that if they sign the consent, federal law may not protect their information from further disclosure; and that if they sign the consent, they can set a time period for the duration of that consent. If taxpayers fail to set a time period, the consent is valid for a maximum of one year.

To prevent consent requests from individual taxpayers from bring buried in fine print, the rules require the paper consent documents to be in 12-point type on 81/2 by 11 inch paper and require electronic consent requests to be in the same type as the Web site’s standard text, all to prevent consent requests from being too difficult to read for individual taxpayers.

If a taxpayer declines to provide consent for an unrelated tax preparation disclosure or use request, the preparer cannot make a similar consent request. The intent is to protect taxpayers from being pressured with repeated consent requests regarding the same issue.

Mandatory consent from taxpayers also is required if the tax information is going to be disclosed to a tax preparer located outside the United States. This provision is intended to ensure taxpayers are informed if their tax information is being sent off-shore for return preparation. The individual taxpayer’s Social Security Number also must be redacted.

The press release also states:

One issue that was raised during the comment period was the use by tax return preparers of tax return information to market Refund Anticipation Loans (RALs) to taxpayers. The issue of marketing RALs and similar products, such as Refund Anticipation Checks and Audit Insurance, was not specifically addressed in the proposed regulations.

The Treasury Department and the IRS are concerned that RALs and similar products may provide preparers with a financial incentive to take improper tax return positions in order to inflate refund claims inappropriately. In order to give the public an opportunity to comment on this issue, the Treasury Department and the IRS are issuing an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) that announces they are considering a proposal that tax return preparers be prohibited from disclosing or using taxpayer return information for the purpose of selling products such as RALs and similar products.

Last year it came to light that a Jackson Hewitt franchise owner with a lot of branches was being charged by the federal government for enabling this type of fraud. The dollar amount of the fraud was calculated by the government at about $70 million.

Here is the post, I wrote about this particular incident:

Is tax fraud being enabled by too many dishonest preparers?

While the Jackson Hewitt allegations were major news, it probably only accounts for a small portion of the overall fraud committed with tax returns. In previous years, we've even seen prisoners file phony tax returns from behind bars.

Dishonest preparers also sometimes try to get their customers to claim questionable exemptions. This can lead to the customer ending up in a lot of trouble at a later date.

The IRS has a educational document to educate taxpayers about this problem, here.

If you happen to know of anyone committing any of these tax frauds, the IRS has a place where it can be reported, here.

Press release on the new rules and possible restrictions on RAL products, here.

There are articles circulating in the mainstream media with more information on how this might hurt the profitability of the tax preparation industry. I'll include the one from Reuters written by Jonathan Stempel, here.

13 percent of the U.S. population were fraud victims, according to the FTC

More than one out of ten people fell victim to a fraud scheme last year, according to the Federal Trade Commission. Of even greater interest was the fact that weight-loss scams came out number one, over lottery and buyers-club scams.

From the FTC press release on this:

The Federal Trade Commission today released a statistical survey of fraud in the United States that shows that 30.2 million adults – 13.5 percent of the adult population – were victims of fraud during the year studied. More people – an estimated 4.8 million U.S. consumers – were victims of fraudulent weight-loss products than any of the other frauds covered by the survey.

Fraudulent foreign lottery offers and buyers club memberships tied for second place in the survey. Lottery scams occur when consumers are told they have won a foreign lottery that they had not entered. Victims supplied either personal information such as their bank account numbers or paid money to receive their “winnings.” In the case of buyers clubs, victims are billed for a “membership” they had not agreed to buy. An estimated 3.2 million people were victims of these frauds during the period studied.

Here is another set of statistics worth evaluating:

Print advertising – direct mail, including catalogs, newspaper and magazine advertising, and posters and flyers – was used to pitch fraudulent offers in 27 percent of reported incidents. The Internet, including Web sites, auction sites, and e-mail, was used to make 22 percent of the fraudulent pitches. Television or radio accounted for 21 percent of the pitches, and telemarketing accounted for nine percent.

Interestingly enough, at least according to this survey, the Internet is only one venue used to pitch fraudulent schemes. Almost half (48 percent) were pitched by more traditional marketing venues, such as direct mail, newspaper and magazine advertising, television advertising and telemarketing.

Schemes pitched via the Internet only accounted for 21 percent of the reported incidents.

The full release by the FTC, along with consumer tips can be read, here.

The FTC has another page worth reading (I like the fact that it points out certain behaviors that most fraudsters exhibit), here.

Both of these links contain information on where to report fraud, which is highly recommended. The sad truth is that a lot of fraud victims never report being taken advantage of. Admitting that you were taken in by one of these schemes is embarrassing to a lot of people.

Trust me, there are a lot of people out there that fall for something that's too good to be true. Not reporting a scam probably means another person is probably going to end up being victimized by it.

With all the publications, television and radio shows, and direct mail come-ons out there, the FTC needs help identifying all the fraud that is out there.

I wonder what would happen if laws were passed that required advertising (marketing) mediums to exercise a little due diligence (act with a certain standard of care) before accepting money to plaster some of these fraudulent schemes all over the place?

One thing is for certain, most fraudsters aren't going to be able to get their customers to promote their goods, or services without paying them to do so!