THE FACEBOOK SCAM ON TWITTER USERS

The #FBscam

Note there are other similar scams popping up that do not use FB app pages (probably because it's been deactivated as detailed below). They usually start with URLs like twitlter.com and tvivvter.com and similar name lookalikes. I have added a section below for these called Twitter-lookalike scams

#FBscam Summary

BREAKING NEWS, 22 Sep 2012, Facebook have finally acted and deactivated this site. I'll leave the content for info since most new scams popping up are similar.

Tweeps there is a Facebook app scam running, which has two evil purposes.

1. It steals your Twitter account information so the perpetrators can propagate their scam using your account.

2. It downloads spyware to your computer so they can access everything you access on your computer.

Background

It’s elegant in its simplicity. It’s most powerful feature is that it’s a genuine Facebook App and hence looks harmless.

Note: Facebook are not the perpetrators, just the sponsors of the app, which is written by the perpetrators and links to the perpetrators URLs of which there are many.

When one URL is removed another pops up and the Facebook app is revised to point to the new URL.

This is all going on under Facebook’s nose and they seem unwilling or unable to do anything about it.

I have reported it to Facebook countless times and have received their emails to which I have responded with the material below. Yet they continue to do nothing about it and the scam continues unabated.

How the scam works

Using a captured account, they send Direct Messages (DMs) to all the followers of that account. Not all at once, just a few at a time, metered so as not to cause too much alarm.

The DM is intended to get your attention. It will say things like:

“Lol, I see you are famous now” or

“Lol, didn’t you see them recording you” or

“Someone is saying disgusting things about you” etc.

In each case above they provide a link to the Facebook app which has been static for several weeks now as:

http://apps.facebook.com/137822973031147/

Here is how it looks:

Note this is a genuine Facebook app page so it does have a “Report/Contact this App” feature at the bottom right of the page. I've exercised this many times to no avail.

The suspicious Tweep will close down this app and ignore it. After all the only URL that should ever ask you for this information is "https://twitter.com"  If it's any other URL then it’s fraudulent.

The investigative Tweep may try entering any false account and password.

They’ll discover it doesn’t complain about the bad account/password. Hence they have confirmed the scam.

The false details will be sent on and things will progress per “The unsuspecting Tweep” below except that nobody’s account is hacked.

Incidentally a smart trick here is to enter the account name of that from which you got the DM and enter a junk password. If their logs are automated, which they probably are, this will overwrite the previously correct password, so that account may now be safe.

The cheeky Tweep will give them hell by sending them messages via the account and password fields. This is good for the ego but it’s not going to make much difference to the perpetrators.

The unsuspecting Tweep blissfully enters their account and password details at which point this information is sent to the perpetrators, thus their account is now hacked and available for use in further propagating the scam.

You are then passed to a page on their URL which has varied over the past weeks from

http://songmo.omgtweetprofit.org/tmb/zoom/newvideo.php

or

http://funson.twittergangs.info/tmb/zoom/newvideo.php

or

http://woot.tweetelf.info/tmb/zoom/newvideo.php

or

http://hume.funnietweets.info/tmb/zoom/newvideo.php

and others

***BEWARE THESE SITES TRY TO BREAK THROUGH YOUR FIREWALL***

The page is always the same and looks like this:

Now we are down to the main purpose of the scam which is to get you to install their spyware onto your computer.

The unsuspecting Tweep with hit the “Install” button at which time the spyware installer is downloaded, disguised to look like a Flash Player update. Then they will proceed with the install and the spyware is now loaded to their computer.

The BullGuard report

So that I could report the file to BullGuard I did hit the “Install”, took note of the file name being downloaded and aborted the download. The file was “FlashPlayerV10.1.57.1---.exe”

On checking with Adobe I found my Flash Player was currently version 11, so their scam is looking a little out of date. I wonder if they will fix that!

BullGuard confirmed the file contained “malicious code” meaning "Virus" or "Spyware". Nobody is going to go to this much trouble to play around with a virus, so you can bet on it being spyware, which is probably making them a living; else they wouldn’t be doing it

So here is the BullGuard Email/Report in full:

QUOTE

Subj: [116-17E58413-024A] BullGuard Support Inquiry‏
Date: 16/9/2012

Dear Robert,


Thank you for contacting BullGuard Support.

I am contacting you with regards to the Facebook application renamed as "FlashPlayerV10.1.57.1---.exe that you submitted to our attention. The result of our virus lab is indeed positive: the app does contain malicious code and it will be detected by our Antivirus engine with the next update.

I would like to thank you for drawing our attention to this security issue.

Do not hesitate to contact us if you require any additional assistance or information. 

Please remember our Support Service is available 24/7 at support@bullguard.com andhttps://www.bullguard.com/support/live-support.aspx, or through the BullGuard application > Support section.

Thank you for your cooperation. 

Best regards, 

Cristiana Cucu
BullGuard Support Team
support@bullguard.com 
http://www.bullguard.com

UNQUOTE

Finale

Enjoy playing with this scam Tweeps. Give them hell !!
Spread the word so we starve these crooks out of it and if we all keep reporting the App to Facebook via the “Report/Contact this App” (Bottom right of the App screen) it may just wake them up from their apparent slumber.

Twitter-lookalike scams

Scammers spotted thus far are using URL tvivvter.com (now disappeared) and twitlter.com.
The latter has been reported to Google via http://www.google.com/safebrowsing/report_phish/ and is now trapped by Google chrome. Other browsers may not do so. It links you to a similar page to the #FBscam. Here's their scam page:

This scam appears to be in a development phase as it links to Twitter to try and authenticate the account/password detail. This is what you get currently:

All they will achieve with this scam so far is to steal your account and password details.

Unbelievable as it may seem but dare I say it "I think we are winning the Twitter scammers war". No maybe I won't say it. Should know better! It will go on forever so watch out for them!

Anatomy of a Conservative

I am posting this because my son asked me about a second cousin who was into politics.
It reminded me of how I became so anti-ALP.
You see, this second cousin is the infamous Stan Keon. One of those so called "evil guys" who broke up the ALP in 1955 and helped form the DLP.

Here is his amazing biography http://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/keon-standish-michael-stan-12734

He was also the guy that got me the strap in 1955, from my 5th grade teacher, Mr Fisher, who was obviously an ALP extremist. "Mr Fisher" will be known hereafter as the "bastard" for reasons you will soon see.

Here is how that story went.

There I was sitting in class minding my own business when the "bastard" asked me "who is Stan Keon?", "don't know" I replied. With that he marched me out the front and gave me the strap and told me to ask my parents who he was and not to forget it. The other kids in the class later asked "what was that all about". I had no idea!

Anyway, on asking, I was told he was "on the bad catholic side of the family" and that he was in politics and had caused trouble for the ALP. My Mum and Dad were also huge fans of the ALP so I got no support there.

After doing some recent research with the help of the internet and social media, I managed to confirm the "bastards" name and the time-line which showed that I was in 5th grade at the Essendon North State School in 1955 when the ALP/DLP bust up happened.

So this "bastard" has taken out his frustrations with his perceived enemies on an innocent kid. What an utter "bastard" indeed!

Anyway I am now gunning for the "bastard". He would be well dead by now but if I could find his grave I would take a leak on it for sure.

Global Warming Debate - An Engineering Perspective

Update June 17th 2013

I notice people are still viewing this old blog so it's time for an update.

There is now a significant amount of material which closes the door on this debate.

The first issue I would like to review is "just how much can we humans expect to be able to control nature by varying human CO2 levels?"

This chart sums it up.

So the total Greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere is dominated by natural water vapor, which is at 95% of the total.

CO2 makes up just 3.6% of the total and human CO2 makes up just 3.2% of that.

Hence the maximum influence we can expect over nature's greenhouse gasses is 3.2% of that 3.6% = 3.6*3.2/100 =  0.1152% or approximately 0.12% as shown in the diagram.

So if earth were the Titanic, then by offloading all humans and their nasty industrialization from it, we can expect to be able to steer the Titanic with a rudder 0.12% the size of natures rudder. Obviously we can't go to such an extreme so lets say we can halve human CO2 output, which by the way, is near impossible. So now we get to have a control influence of 0.06% of natures influence.

So by spending trillions of dollars we can build a rudder about the size of an icy pole stick, with which we hope to steer the Titanic where we want to go, and not where nature wants to go with her gigantic Titanic rudder. 

FAT CHANCE!

As futile as it is to drive nature with human CO2 levels as shown above, lets now do a reality check on this massive 400 ppm of CO2 in the atmosphere that the warmists want us to panic about.

The questions that need answering here are:

1. How unusual is the 400 ppm level?

2. Has earth coped with it previously?

3. Does CO2 actually cause warming?

Question 1 & 2 help to answer question 3 in this link from 2010, which looks at the CO2 and warming issue from a Geologist perspective.

http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/Carboniferous_climate.html

So the answer to Q1 becomes clear. The link shows that not only has earth been at 400 ppm before, this level is alarmingly low in the history of CO2 levels. In fact the report uses the term "CO2 Impoverished" to describe our current levels.

As for Q2, the link above shows that earth has coped with levels 17 times today's level, without hitting any tipping point or extreme temperatures. Even if it did, this is nature! Industrialization wasn't around in the Cambrian or Carboniferous Periods. 

As for Q3, CO2 may effect warming but the link shows that it's not significant in comparison with the Geological state of the planet. Furthermore, Astronomers will tell you it's also insignificant in comparison to the Perihelia, the earths tilt angle, the specific orbit and the solar activity. 

All of the above are independent variables which can fall into a state which brings about climate conditions from ice ages to significant warm phases.

The most challenging state for human life is an ice age. Some of the variables above are in an ice age state at this time.

If CO2 does cause warming, then its dangerously low levels are also in an ice age state.

It seems to me that we should be cranking up our CO2 output and fast.

This climate scam is farcical and illogical, but most of all it's criminal for what it has done to many economies.

As Richard Lindzen, 2010, Lead Author, IPCC 3rd Assessment report puts it. "This period will be remembered as a bizarre footnote in the history of science".

It's made money for the press, funding and notoriety for the climate scientists, provided a tax and control platform for governments, but most of all, it has destroyed the economies of countries that most wanted to be influenced by it.

It's time to WAKE UP to this scam before it's too late for your country!

Robert Keon, June 1st, 2013, updated June 17, 2013.
PS. I am aware that the above oversimplifies the climate debate. That's for good reason.
For those who want more in-depth discussion from an engineering perspective, I recommend this paper: 

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/06/14/an-engineers-take-on-climate-change-2/

Here's the old post from just 12 months ago. It's quite dated so it's good for historical purposes only.

Preface

When Al Gore presented the postulate that CO2 caused uncontrolled warming, I, like many others, accepted the evidence presented as “the most likely scenario”.

Like others, I was too busy making a living to do any cross checking or research on the subject so I just went with the flow.

Having semi-retired early last year and now, with the luxury of time, I decided I would research this subject since it had become apparent that an alarming amount of scepticism had overtaken Al Gore’s position.

At that time I would have considered myself to be a passive warmist.

This summary is presented to show the conclusion that most people of my background would arrive at after doing some light research over a few months, starting with a completely open mind on the subject.

The reason I am so confident of this is that the evidence is heavily one sided. So much so that I had considered that I must have missed some vital evidence and expended significant effort in seeking a properly balanced view.

Having come to the conclusion that the sceptics are right and realizing the extreme significance, I believe it is vitally important that those of us that are able should do their own independent research, so that they too understand the significance in relation to present government policy, not just in this country but the world over.

My background is professional engineering, specifically in electronics/communication disciplines with experience in the aviation industry in auto-pilot, control systems, navigation, electronics, communications and instrumentation systems. So, nothing to do with climate science, however the fact that I have been heavily involved with R&D could be a factor in my research techniques and findings.

AGW Summary

CO2 Scare, Where did it come from?

Al Gore, a social scientist and former US vice president, presented the “CO2 causes uncontrolled warming” postulate to the world around 2005/6.

In science you can postulate anything. It’s only after you have exhausted all possible means of refuting your postulate that you can accept it as fact. Failure to do so renders your science as “pseudo-science”.

The IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), operating under the UN charter was so concerned by the ramifications of this postulate that it decided that immediate action was required, just in case the postulate was confirmed as fact. Hence, by their own admission, they triggered their scare campaign under a “pseudo-science” banner. Their justification was a perceived consequence of delaying corrective action if the postulate proved to be fact.

This is where it all went wrong. Green politics then interfered to such an extent that little or no effort was put into refuting Al Gore’s postulate. The situation became much worse as other science bodies started to produce empirical evidence, which did indeed refute the postulate. Instead of considering that evidence, the IPCC actively discouraged and discredited such sources. In doing so the IPCC contravened all the traditional protocols and ethics of science.

One important study showing that CO2 has no effect on warming is given in Ref 1. In this study a technique similar to that of correlation, as used in communications to extract signal from noise, is used to try to identify the existence of Al Gore’s CO2 hockey stick signal in the real Global Surface Temperature (GST) data. My background makes me confident that, if the signal was there, this technique would find it but it didn’t. Hence Al Gore’s postulate is refuted and thus invalid. The worst thing is that the IPCC don’t want to know about it. To my knowledge no empirical evidence has ever been presented by the IPCC to counter this.

Another important piece of evidence is the GST predictions being conducted by Dr Nicola Scafetta’s group. Ref 2 shows the group’s GST prediction made in the year 2000 is still tracking real GST data except for the latest HadCRUT3 data, where the actual GST data is slightly below their predicted range (NB “below” not “above”). Note that the IPCC prediction made in year 2007 is completely off track, so much so that it appears to be a deliberate attempt to cause alarm. Again the worst thing about this is that the IPCC don’t want to know about it and again, to my knowledge, no empirical evidence has ever been presented by the IPCC to counter it.

How the IPCC and their science, which had started out being so genuinely concerned for the good of the planet, became such a politically divisive body of pseudoscience is a question that will be asked for a long time to come.

I was astounded to learn recently that there is no empirical evidence linking CO2 to uncontrolled warming. For a long time, I pleaded with warmists for such evidence, only to find that several groups had offered significant $$$ for such data. None has ever been forthcoming. All I found supporting the IPCC science is loads and loads of verbose suggestive material. For example the recent re-run of an old scare documentary by the left/green dominated SBS “Arctic With Bruce Parry: Norway” where an old bearded guy says he has “never seen anything like this before, it must be man-made warming”. I wonder if that old guy knows the cyclic effects of the sun has periods well beyond his life-span. I also wonder what he would say if he knew that the sea ice levels are now at a 6 year high and rapidly approaching a 10 year high.

As indicated above, one of the tactics of the IPCC is to discredit other sources of scientific data. They support this approach by claiming that 97% of climate scientists are in agreement with them, so they have the credibility!!

It takes a few months to gather most of the evidence from both sides of the debate. One thing that becomes clear from such an exercise is that, either the 97% are completely unproductive while the 3% are quite the opposite or the 97% claim is mere fantasy. I see that they have now starting quoting “97 to 98%”. Obviously the 97% figure wasn’t doing it for them!

Conclusion

When conducting research of this type it is vitally important to maintain focus on the material being sought. This is the subject of a scientific postulate.  Hence if its proponents are to be considered “scientific” then we expect to find evidence of their exhaustive efforts to refute their postulate. I found no such evidence. In fact I found no evidence that they had even lifted a finger in pursuit of that goal. This in itself is positive evidence that this group is not being scientific.

What I did find is a mountain of material, which I have dubbed “irrelevant green spin”. It’s important not to be distracted by it but by all means be angered by the billions of our dollars spent by our governments to produce it.

The above is merely a brief summary of my research process and findings. For more detail on this vast subject I suggest Ref 3 which presents an excellent overview from a fellow Engineer. It's a three part video presentation, easily understood and covers most aspects in great detail. In the final part (part 3) the politics of this subject are reviewed. As a follow on from this, I suggest Ref 4 which extracts quotes from a 1944 document that show how our Western Style democracy could be brought down by socialists or communists. It's of significant concern that many of the processes discussed are in place at this time and this climate scare campaign is partly to blame.

Thanks for taking the time to read my summary.

Robert Keon, Apr 4, 2012

Last Updated June 1, 2013

References:

Ref 1: The GST correlation evidence http://climaterealists.com/attachments/ftp/Verification%20Dan%20P.pdf

Ref 2: Dr Nicola Scafetta year 2000 predictions versus IPCC year 2007 predictions http://wattsupwiththat.com/reference-pages/scafettas-solar-lunar-cycle-forecast-vs-global-temperature/

Ref 3: Dr David Evans Video Presentation of the global warming debate

http://joannenova.com.au/2012/04/david-evans-explains-the-skeptics-case-youtube/

Ref 4: The process of destruction of our Western civilization by socialists/communists as reviewed in 1944

http://www.textfiles.com/politics/byeusa.yes

Acronyms:

IPCC=Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

AGW=Anthropogenic (man-made) Global Warming

ACC= Anthropogenic Climate Change

GST=Global Surface Temperature

United Nations Agenda 21 - An Australian viewpoint

Agenda 21

The carbon tax and global warming will hopefully soon be just a distant memory of scatter brained green ideology gone wrong. However we are not out of the woods yet. Here comes Agenda 21. It’s much worse and is legally binding. When a government signs up for it they are signing over their countries sovereignty to the UN.

When Bob Brown spoke of the new world order, you all thought he was daydreaming. He was referring to Agenda 21. “It could even be headed up in Australia” he spruced (presumably with BB as its supreme leader OMG!).

When BB said he has a plan to stop the carbon tax from ever being revoked, he was referring to Agenda 21.

So what is Agenda 21 and why am I so afraid of it. And you should be too by the way!

In a nutshell Agenda 21 is Communism disguised in a green wrapper.

Agenda 21 sets in law how your countries land is to be utilized. It defines in detail what you can do, what you can’t do and what you must do with it. Under its regulations it’s laws are to be policed by your own police departments.

It defines a matrix of urban development zones surrounded by open land areas, zoned as “no development”, linked by roads that will be routed so as not to threaten any species (snails, ants etc).

If you own property outside the urban area you cannot do any development on it. If the house burns down or falls down you can’t re-build. You can’t add sheds, extensions or even shade sails. Effectively your property becomes worthless.

Its laws are highly detailed and there is a lot more to it than given in my summary above.
For example there has been a case of a woman in Arkansas arrested and jailed under an Agenda 21 law. What did she do wrong you ask! She didn’t water her front lawn.


Refer to this link for more Agenda 21 detail: http://ppjg.me/2012/03/14/agenda-21-on-steroids/

Governments are signing up to Agenda 21 without fully understanding it and even without realizing that it is legally binding. Bill Clinton signed the US up to Agenda 21. When G. W. Bush later realized what it meant he was prepared to go to war to undo Clinton’s error and the US as a whole are now not a signatory to it, however many individual states have signed up. The attraction is the significant climate funding that goes with it.

However the local Greens obviously have Agenda 21 in the plans for implementation here. They will try to slide this controlling matrix in under our noses with as little discussion as possible, and they will do it prior to their government being toppled. We must not let this happen!

I suggest you all research Agenda 21 to see if it offends you as much as it does me.

If you are on twitter follow @axeco2tax.

If you are not on twitter then get on it and do the follow. It only takes a few minutes to set up a twitter account.


Robert Keon, 12 Feb 2012
Updated 16 April 2012