Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

PayPal Most Phished, Facebook Most Blocked

CmdrTaco posted more than 3 years ago | from the slashdot-most-beloved dept.

Crime 37

Orome1 writes "OpenDNS released statistics about which websites were commonly blocked — and which websites users were frequently given access to — in 2010. The report additionally details the companies online scammers targeted in 2010, as well as where the majority of phishing websites were hosted. Facebook is both one of the most blocked and the most allowed websites, reflecting the push/pull of allowing social sites in schools and the workplace. On the other hand, 45 percent of all phishing attempts made in 2010 were targeting PayPal."

cancel ×

37 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Obscurity FTW (2, Insightful)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 3 years ago | (#35000086)

My strategy of never having either a PayPal or Facebook account appears to have paid off!

Re:Obscurity FTW (4, Insightful)

MrEricSir (398214) | more than 3 years ago | (#35000194)

Congratulations, by not doing popular things, you're a better person than everyone else!

Re:Obscurity FTW (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35000354)

I <3 your sig!

Re:Obscurity FTW (2)

eepok (545733) | more than 3 years ago | (#35000722)

Not better... but safer.

Re:Obscurity FTW (1)

FooBarWidget (556006) | more than 3 years ago | (#35000952)

By locking my computer in a safe and throwing it into the ocean, it is a more secure computer than everybody else's.

Re:Obscurity FTW (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35001388)

I hope you remembered to get the watertight safe, or data restoration could be pretty hard.

Re:Obscurity FTW (1)

oPless (63249) | more than 3 years ago | (#35006226)

I wouldn't worry, it's super secure - there's nothing on the hard disk!

Re:Obscurity FTW (1)

Suki I (1546431) | more than 3 years ago | (#35000270)

I do enjoy my Facebook account. Being picky about my 4,000+ friends list really helps.

Never got into the PayPal.

Re:Obscurity FTW (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35000280)

By deciding to not have a facebook account, you've prevented the risk of problems occuring with your facebook account! Good job.

Re:Obscurity FTW (1)

Cro Magnon (467622) | more than 3 years ago | (#35000638)

You don't need a PayPal account to get phished. Awhile back, I got an email informing me of a problem with my account and they would clear it up if I entered my acct details. I was all set to do that when I realized - I don't HAVE a PP account!

Re:Obscurity FTW (4, Informative)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 3 years ago | (#35002300)

This is the problem with PayPal. They actually do send real emails to customers about their account. Because this is the only way they can contact their customers. Everybody knows (or should know) that your bank will never send you an email and ask you to verify account information. And and disregard any email that is apparently coming from your bank. However, many people will trust an email that appears to be from PayPal, because paypal regularly corresponds with customers via email. Paypal is basically a bank that only works via email. Which makes it a prime target for phishers.

Re:Obscurity FTW (2)

Man Eating Duck (534479) | more than 3 years ago | (#35006202)

This is the problem with PayPal. They actually do send real emails to customers about their account. Because this is the only way they can contact their customers.

I got an email from them about my account being suspended because of "hacking attempts". I've gotten several, but this one seemed legit because they asked me to call them by looking up their customer service number on their site (no link). I did, and they requested that I faxed them some proof of residence at my address. I faxed them various utility bills, and eventually my account was activated again.

I don't remember the exact course of events, but the line of questions I got made me pretty confident that they really care about security.

Re:Obscurity FTW (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35007402)

> I've gotten several,

Why did you use "gotten" in this context instead of a more appropriate verb such as "received"?

I am genuinely curious, as this "gotten" meme is spreading rapidly.

Paypal - Were the money is (1)

bfmorgan (839462) | more than 3 years ago | (#35000100)

Paraphrasing Dilinger, "Paypal is were the money is".

Re:Paypal - Were the money is (-1, Troll)

Nadaka (224565) | more than 3 years ago | (#35000176)

And good luck getting it back if you are a paypal customer.

Re:Paypal - Were the money is (0)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#35000516)

True, but at least PayPal is stealing it rather than criminals.

Re:Paypal - Were the money is (0)

Nadaka (224565) | more than 3 years ago | (#35000644)

Its not stealing... Its merely locked in arbitration indefinitely while they collect interest on it.

Re:Paypal - Were the money is (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35000380)

Dammit, that money is supposed to be are money! Not Paypal's!

Good riddance (0, Flamebait)

h00manist (800926) | more than 3 years ago | (#35000206)

What a bunch of nonsense. To block or allow a sold-out corrupt money site, or a bunch of teenage-modeled showoffs.

Re:Good riddance (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35000402)

You misunderstand. People and businesses aren't blocking or allowing PayPal. PayPal is just the site that is the hook of the most phishing attacks.

Re:Good riddance (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35005048)

sold-out corrupt money site, or a bunch of teenage-modeled showoffs.

I can't tell which is which.

Skewed data? (1)

Darkness404 (1287218) | more than 3 years ago | (#35000476)

Is it just me or is this data rather skewed because it comes from openDNS? In general, the people who run and configure OpenDNS are completely different in what they block/allow when compared to something like DansGuardian, SonicWall, NortonFamily and other programs meant to target the average user. So to claim that Facebook is more blocked than porn sites most likely is not true, its just that those people are using things that aren't openDNS.

Re:Skewed data? (1)

eggsurplus (631231) | more than 3 years ago | (#35000508)

You can only report on the data that you have at hand. However, keep that in mind when trying to interpret the results.

Re:Skewed data? (1)

LauraOppen (1851676) | more than 3 years ago | (#35000524)

This is just data for the people who choose to whitelist/blacklist. So of the people who DO blacklist, Facebook is #1 The report also includes info about the top categories blocked by network admins, which unsurprisingly, are related to porn. Full disclosure; I work at OpenDNS :) Hope that helps clarify the data.

Re:Skewed data? (1)

gmuslera (3436) | more than 3 years ago | (#35000598)

OpenDNS=free, only you need to use their DNSs and inform your IP

The alternatives imply buying software, dedicate a pc to it, or configure proxies/firewalls

I'd bett that more use it for places like homes, schools or small business, and that could be more in absolute numbers than the alternative

What $DAYJOB Firewall does to these sites (1, Funny)

billstewart (78916) | more than 3 years ago | (#35001250)

  • livejournal.com - blocked: obsessive time-sucker.
  • icanhascheeseburger.com - blocked: You can not has cheeseburger. Here is bukkit.
  • facebook.com - blocked: Medical plan does not cover ADD treatment. $MANAGER has just become Godfather. $CAFETERIA has canoli today. $HR-Department has given you a shrubbery!

OpenDNS (2)

uigrad_2000 (398500) | more than 3 years ago | (#35000522)

I'm not sure how any of this is news. It seems to just be an ad for the OpenDNS service.

The company provides a ton of different services dealing with filtering traffic based on the address. They have one service that blocks commonly misspelled DNS names. They also allow a company to create black or white lists for traffic, for any reason that they want.

The two statistics they list are not related. Obviously phishing for banking information is more successful when you are register a domain name similar to a site whose main purpose is allowing transactions with money (paypal). White and Black lists are bound to be filled with well known websites, of which facebook is definitely in the top ten. The article says that Facebook is the second-most whitelisted site, and doesn't give the first, but I'll bet it's Google.

Easy targets (1)

eiiiI'monslashdot (1951772) | more than 3 years ago | (#35001354)

Obviously paypal is the most phished. Only dumb people would risk paypal. Dumb people are an easy target!

Another reason to block Facebook (3, Insightful)

dbIII (701233) | more than 3 years ago | (#35001404)

I've had to upgrade a few work computers simply because their web browsers were slow to render the truly crappy interface of Facebook while there was other stuff running.
Then people spending too much time looking at Facebook instead of working led to management mandating blanket blocks of everything on the web during peak work times resulting in more time wasting because users had to wait before they can look up work related information.
Technological solutions to minor social problems really suck. The true answer is for management to tell people not to waste time playing on the net instead of cutting the cord.

Re:Another reason to block Facebook (1)

El_Oscuro (1022477) | more than 3 years ago | (#35002296)

Put in /etc/hosts:

127.0.0.1 www.facebook.com

Facebook is now blocked. Problem solved.

Oh, and to clean up a lot of other crappy websites, download the latest /etc/hosts file from mvps.org. [mvps.org] Just make sure your users don't have admin rights. Otherwise you are completely pwnned no matter what you do.

Re:Another reason to block Facebook (1)

Ash-Fox (726320) | more than 3 years ago | (#35004774)

Put in /etc/hosts:

127.0.0.1 www.facebook.com

Why would you use 127.0.0.1 instead of just '0' or 255.255.255.255 ?

Re:Another reason to block Facebook (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35005486)

I must have formatted it wrong.
Putting '0' in my hosts file for a site just resolves the site normally.
255.255.255.255 gives a 'permission denied' when I try a traceroute.
127.0.0.1 resolves to my computer.

I assume we stick with 127.0.0.1 for troubleshooting ease.

Re:Another reason to block Facebook (1)

Ash-Fox (726320) | more than 3 years ago | (#35006444)

Putting '0' in my hosts file for a site just resolves the site normally.

Eh? Not using Windows I take it. 0 is short for 0.0.0.0

255.255.255.255 gives a 'permission denied' when I try a traceroute.

Of course.

I assume we stick with 127.0.0.1 for troubleshooting ease.

Using 127.0.0.1 however wastes the browser's time and resources on trying to establish a socket, if you use anti-virus software, you further waste even more resources by having the anti-virus software intercept the connection and try to connect it self.

Re:Another reason to block Facebook (1)

dbIII (701233) | more than 3 years ago | (#35006426)

Well yes but then people complained that they were being picked on if only Facebook was blocked because it was unfair they couldn't run their virtual farm but I could order computer parts for work purposes online, the secretary could order stationary etc etc. Instead of management telling them to piss off and play Facebook games at home they decided to block everything.
As you should have read above - a technical solution to a social problem is not going to work so I was not looking for one of the many blatantly obvious ones.

Re:Another reason to block Facebook (1)

memojuez (910304) | more than 3 years ago | (#35006578)

Facebook, MySpace are blocked by law [fcc.gov] in all schools and public libraries that receive Federal Technology Dollars called E-Rate. The Children's Internet Protection Act [wikipedia.org] was created as back door censorship by making it an additional require for poorer districts to receive needed funds to stay technologically relevant. Earlier attempts [wikipedia.org] to censor the web [wikipedia.org] at these locations were overturned by the Supreme Court on First Amendment Grounds.

It has created a cat and mouse game as kids find new proxies to circumvent black listing, including building their own Linux based Proxies at home, and MIS Depts charged with complying with the law. But, as smart phones continue to proliferate amongst the students, the law will be lose its impact.

Re:Another reason to block Facebook (1)

yuhong (1378501) | more than 3 years ago | (#35015438)

Yea, I know. Luckily I don't visit Facebook much at all, let alone at school. I care more about Reddit being blocked at my school. FYI my school uses Lightspeed as the vendor.

One word comes to mind... (1)

Jedimstr397 (1000256) | more than 3 years ago | (#35002780)

Whoooaa.
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>