Groups > sci.electronics.design > #725947

Re: Phishing

Path	csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From	Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com>
Newsgroups	sci.electronics.design
Subject	Re: Phishing
Date	Mon, 9 Sep 2024 14:50:58 -0700
Lines	28
Message-ID	<lk98u2F3m28U2@mid.individual.net> (permalink)
References	<vbcvp4$eoqp$1@dont-email.me> <jdqpdj91vfciusj4hn5cj1b6eiqkibet9j@4ax.com>
Mime-Version	1.0
Content-Type	text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding	7bit
X-Trace	individual.net 7qEP+p1WcfvExDVBMsK0sAyDBBgV74XJ8QCgvoNiTYqc1FnC+E
Cancel-Lock	sha1:yPUuSJVjLnCM4NAReCFSFviayVY= sha256:i4GR91hqNo5yHgArb9EHDG3tYS4a0Zk2EwHo9DD4eQA=
User-Agent	Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.8.1
In-Reply-To	<jdqpdj91vfciusj4hn5cj1b6eiqkibet9j@4ax.com>
Content-Language	en-US
Xref	csiph.com sci.electronics.design:725947

Show key headers only | View raw

On 9/7/24 5:04 PM, john larkin wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Sep 2024 12:11:24 -0700, Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid>
> wrote:
> 
>> I'm checking my "deflected" incoming mail to see if anything that
>> *should* have been allowed through was mistakenly diverted
>> (false positive).
>>
>> I see a fair number of phishing attempts on my "public" accounts.
>> But, all are trivially identified as such.
>>
>> So, how is it that folks (organizations) are so often deceived
>> by these things?  Are users just lazy?  Would it be more helpful
>> to have mail clients make it HARDER to activate an embedded
>> URL or "potentially compromised" attachment?
>>
>> Or, will the stupidity of users adapt, accordingly?
> 
> I've noticed that I get very little spam or phishing on Saturday or
> Sunday. Do bots get the weekend off?
> 

Only the unionized bots do.

-- 
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

Back to sci.electronics.design | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Phishing Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2024-09-05 12:11 -0700
  Re: Phishing john larkin <jl@650pot.com> - 2024-09-05 15:11 -0700
    Re: Phishing legg <legg@nospam.magma.ca> - 2024-09-07 09:18 -0400
      Re: Phishing john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> - 2024-09-07 07:26 -0700
  Re: Phishing "Edward Rawde" <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2024-09-05 19:56 -0400
    Re: Phishing Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2024-09-06 11:51 -0700
      Re: Phishing "Edward Rawde" <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2024-09-06 19:59 -0400
        Re: Phishing Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2024-09-06 17:26 -0700
          Re: Phishing "Edward Rawde" <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2024-09-06 20:41 -0400
  Re: Phishing Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2024-09-07 11:35 -0700
    Re: Phishing Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2024-09-07 15:18 -0700
      Re: Phishing Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2024-09-09 13:58 -0700
        Re: Phishing Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2024-09-09 14:41 -0700
          Re: Phishing Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2024-09-09 14:50 -0700
            Re: Phishing Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> - 2024-09-09 16:31 -0700
        Re: Phishing ehsjr <ehsjr@verizon.net> - 2024-09-09 18:30 -0400
  Re: Phishing john larkin <jlarkin_highland_tech> - 2024-09-07 17:04 -0700
    Re: Phishing Jasen Betts <usenet@revmaps.no-ip.org> - 2024-09-09 05:01 +0000
    Re: Phishing Joerg <news@analogconsultants.com> - 2024-09-09 14:50 -0700
      Re: Phishing john larkin <jl@650pot.com> - 2024-09-09 16:08 -0700

csiph-web