Category Archives: Digital Crime
Shoulder Surfing & Your Smartphone A Case Study ‘For Your Eyes Only’
For Your Eyes Only
Whilst reading an excellent article this morning in The Age ‘Keeping Out Smart Phone Snoops, by Brian Chen I noted the underlying theme of his article was locking your smartphone, where the article clearly stated: ‘One of the easiest ways to add a layer of security to your smartphone is requiring a password to get past the initial lock screen’.
Having read the article and agreeing with its range of valuable tips on protecting your data in your smartphone, I thought it prudent to bring to subscribers of Cyber Guardians Online the background of a common criminal activity known as ‘Shoulder Surfing‘ that surfaced in the early 1990′s.
Shoulder Surfing
I personally came across shoulder surfing as a Federal Agent, where as one of the inaugural members of the newly formed Computer Crime Unit in Sydney, a significant file came across my desk involving an Australian traveling on business in New York City and coming home to a home phone bill in excess of $2 Million. It was early in the 1990′s, pre mobile phones, where travelers could opt to link a home phone account to a ‘Calling Card‘. Calling cards were great, go to any phone in the world, call a local dedicated number and either tell the operator or on some occasions just key in your calling card number and personal identification number (PIN) to make a call anywhere and have it recorded on your home phone bill.
One major problem back then was that phone companies did not have safeguards built in to detect simultaneous calls from the same calling card that were being made from various locations around the globe and as such fraud was rife. The manner in which the fraud was conducted was quite simple, all one had to do was obtain the calling card number and PIN and all calls were made at the account holders expense.
Free international phone calls in a multicultural city like New York City was a commodity that was extremely valuable on the black market, where a person with just one calling card number and PIN could on sell the details hundreds of times a day usually for $20 and of course the purchaser of that calling card number and PIN would also then on sell the details as well. Furthermore, the illicit transaction could be guaranteed with all parties ‘testing’ the cards validity at a local phone box.
Obtaining the Account Number and PIN
As you could imagine obtaining calling card details became very lucrative and this is where criminal enterprises resorted to some basic surveillance 101 tactics of which I will refer to here in dot point form:
- Standing behind the person at the payphone and memorizing the persons account number and PIN (clearly an apprentice card counter in the making)
- Using telephoto lenses and video taping persons entering personal details into the payphone
- Standing close by or on the other side of the row of payphones in airports, bus interchanges and railway stations and writing down account details and PIN’s as customers spoke to a calling card operator.
As you can see it was not that hard to obtain such personal details and turn a simple few numbers into a positive cash flow operation within minutes and generally the card would remain active until the unsuspecting victim received a telephone bill he/she could not jump over.
Yes, phone companies became smarter over time and introduced safeguards similar to what banks have in place now with ATM card transactions. However, the above scenario was the breeding ground for producing ‘Shoulder Surfing’ experts who now operate with a view to obtaining your mobile/cell phone after securing your PIN from Shoulder Surfing.
Locking Your Phone Is Not Enough
Hence the underlying theme of this post is to warn you that locking your phone with a PIN is your first level of defense, your PIN needs to protected with vigilance. How many times do you sit in the open and enter your PIN without covering your actions whilst:
- At Bus/Train stops?
- On public transport?
- At bars/cafes?
- Walking along crowded streets?
- Opposite a work colleague?
Furthermore, how many of you have your mobile/cell phone PIN’s set the same as your bank ATM cards? Surprisingly a high majority do so and this opens a whole new Pandora’s box, with ATM and credit card fraud.
All it takes is for the person who has acquired your phones PIN code to obtain your phone and ATM cards either through pickpocketing, bag snatch and or surveilling you home or to work and obtaining your phone and cards where at times you may not notice the theft until the morning or at the end of your workday. The domino effect can lead to your suffering severe financial loss as banks are reluctant to reimburse funds to persons who do not protect PIN numbers.
Finally what other data is stored on your phone as The Age article highlighted and as indicated here in this post, crime gangs the world over have had years to perfect the simple art of ‘Shoulder Surfing’ and it is re-emerging as a criminal activity that will capitalize on unsuspecting citizens going about their daily business.
Reference
The Age, Chen, B., Sunday April 5 2013,
For Your Eyes Only
Crimes That Create Community Outrage And Fake Social Media Accounts
Several recent tragic events both here in Australia and in the United States have been exasperated by persons creating fake social media sites and posting comments that are about criminal matters before the courts. In Australia these comments can be deemed ‘sub judas’ (under judicial consideration) and may constitute interference with due process leading to contempt of court proceedings. The United States do not have such tight restrictions on comments sub judas due to the First Amendment and the right to free speech, however, cases have been overturned where the defendant was convicted in an atmosphere of a media circus.
Facebook & Twitter Impacting Serious Criminal Cases
As the police either charge an offender or identify a suspect with regards to a major crime and if that crime has been featured in the media, persons appear to create Facebook and twitter accounts at an alarming rate in the name of the suspect almost immediately after the crime has occurred and post comments that are either in what appear to be a sarcastic positive light towards the person charged or extremely disturbing comments and opinions that on occasion contain graphic images.
In addition to the aforementioned abhorrent behaviour some people who are appear to be deeply psychologically disturbed create phenomenally disturbing Facebook and Twitter accounts and post comments and images that can have an impact not only the court proceedings but also on the metal well being of persons who read such posts. Additionally, these comments may also be deemed to fall under one of the categories of cyber bullying, stalking, harassment, intimidation and or vilification creating anxiety and psychological trauma to victims, their friends, relatives and the community in general.
A review of social media sites over the last six months especially after crimes that have featured heavily in the media has revealed the following.
Examples:
- A fake Facebook page depicting to be the brother of an alleged murderer and posting comments how the victim deserved to be raped and murdered.
- Hundreds of comments on the actual alleged murderers Facebook page that due to its virility in cyberspace such actions could lead to the person not being able to have a ‘fair trial’ in the relevant jurisdiction.
- A fake Twitter account depicting to be of the father of a victim with comments about the victim.
- A fake twitter account of a shooting victim showing images of the victim with bullet wounds and making several comments as to how ‘good a shot’ the perpetrator was.
- Hundreds of detrimental comments on Facebook pages of persons recently deceased in car accidents where the deceased person may have been at fault in the accident and death or serious injuries have resulted to other persons.
- Threats of violence and intimidation posted on the Facebook pages of family members of persons suspected of committing a crime.
The speed in which these fake social media accounts are created and the manner in which they generate vulgar comments is of particular concern in that anyone anywhere can create a Facebook or twitter account in a matter of seconds as all that is required is a computer/smart phone or tablet and an internet connection.
The ease and proliferation in creating a social networking site which are used to connect people either publicly or privately via private messages and chat forums increases the risk of ‘fake’ social networking that ultimately is leading to an increase in cyber stalking and bullying related offences.
Whilst no identification verification is required to open a social networking site, it appears no protection is afforded society from persons who are intent on causing distress to recipients of their communication.
Once a person has created the fake account they can commence their antisocial behaviour that may constitute bullying, harassment, stalking and or intimidation and it is here it is important to generically define some of these terms.
Overseas Outsourcing For Fake Account
Information suggests persons are using overseas outsourcing sites like O-Desk to create false accounts offshore in places like India, Bangladesh and several Eastern Bloc countries resulting in virtually untraceable social media account. Some contractors in O-Desk work for 25 cents per hour therefore creating a low cost alternative for a person who is intent on creating hundreds of fake social media accounts. This activity also allows for ‘Imposter’ accounts to be created. (A separate blog will be posted regarding imposter accounts)
Analysis of some online behaviour can be classed as online harassment that includes cyber stalking and cyber bullying that has been described by Stone (1999) to consist of “communications which are often constant, filled with disturbing and inappropriate content, and do not cease even after the victim asks for the behaviors to stop”. Cyber bullying is described as the act of threatening and harassing an individual via messages including blog posts, status updates and chat forums in social networking sites aimed at hurting and humiliating an individual.
As identified by Alba (2012) Wylie (2007) writes that examples of tactics used by bullies include sending a continuous amount of harmful messages or creating humiliating online content via social networking sites as well as posting fake ads to draw the attention of victims. Cyber stalking refers to “the malicious and repeated following and harassing of another person that threatens his or her safety” (Meloy & Gothard, 1995, p.258). Cyber stalking can be performed in various ways including threatening, intimidating and impersonating profiles (Sreedevi, 2012). As described by Neo (2011) cyber stalking may also include actions like “false accusations, monitoring, making threats, identity theft, damage to data or equipment, soliciting minors for sex, or gathering information to harass”.
A person can create with relative ease a fake profile on social networking sites that can include photos, descriptions, multimedia content and information regarding personal interests and location. Additionally, the person creating the fake profile may infiltrate a persons ‘friends’ network and appear to be ‘connected’ whereby others in the ‘friends’ circle may inadvertently link with the person behind the fake account.
Furthermore, Alba (2012)reported that Postmedia News (2012) wrote that victims who experience harassment at school or other environments, for example in the workplace, can now also experience harassment while in the privacy of their own home via social networking sites. Accessibility to social networking sites from not only the home but also via mobile communication means that victims can now be harassed at all hours of the day and the audience for cyber bullying and stalking has become much larger as opposed to traditional social environments.
Sreedevi (2012) points out that cyber criminals have the opportunity to remain anonymous online, making it more difficult for them to be traced and easier to target innocent people. Miller (2010) adds that as bullies or stalkers are not faced with victims who show real feelings online, harassment is easier for attackers making it worse and more hurtful for victims.
Day (2012) writes about a recent case of Tyler Clementi, an 18 year old American college student who committed suicide after his private life was exposed publicly. A video was created of him having sex with a male which was broadcast over the internet via social networking sites. His room mates were also involved in posting and exchanging harmful messages on twitter and failed to realise that these messages can be viewed by all, leading to serious consequences.
Global Instantaneous Reach
Alcindor (2012) explains that unlike exchanging messages on Facebook which can be restricted to a group, Twitter messages are broadcast publicly to a much larger audience. This is an example of how online harassment via social networks can cause real life consequences in real time.
Inability To Take Action
London based Bains Cohen LLP Solicitors (2011) have stated that victims often feel too frightened and powerless to report online harassment to the police and in any case the solicitors explain that often when incidents are reported, victims experience a lack of support as they find that police are either not interested, lack knowledge or the investigation involves a lengthy process. Not all police have sufficient knowledge to deal with online harassment.
On many occasions in Australia the state police will refer the complainant to the Australian Federal Police citing that it is a Commonwealth matter (Federal offence) as the relevant law that govern telecommunications services is a Commonwealth Act, being the Crimes Legislation Amendmnet (Telecommunications Offences and Other Measures) Act (No.2) 2004. However the state police can investigate telecommunications offences and are generally in a better position to do so on most occasions as they are quite frequently domestic related offences. However, with the globalization of digital communication the shift in offence patterns is now shifting towards more complex investigations and as highlighted below the range of offences now under the act is is quite broad and somewhat complex, but nevertheless encompassing in that the legislation captures previously mentioned anti-social. behaviour.
Division 474—Telecommunications offences
Subdivision A—Dishonesty with respect to carriage services
- 474.1 Dishonesty
- 474.2 General dishonesty with respect to a carriage service provider
Subdivision B—Interference with telecommunications
- 474.3 Person acting for a carrier or carriage service provider
- 474.4 Interception devices
- 474.5 Wrongful delivery of communications
- 474.6 Interference with facilities
- 474.7 Modification etc. of a telecommunications device identifier
- 474.8 Possession or control of data or a device with intent to modify a telecommunications device identifier
- 474.9 Producing, supplying or obtaining data or a device with intent to modify a telecommunications device identifier
- 474.10 Copying subscription-specific secure data
- 474.11 Possession or control of data or a device with intent to copy an account identifier
- 474.12 Producing, supplying or obtaining data or a device with intent to copy an account identifier
Subdivision C—Offences related to use of telecommunications
- 474.13 Use of a carriage service
- 474.14 Using a telecommunications network with intention to commit a serious offence
- 474.15 Using a carriage service to make a threat
- 474.16 Using a carriage service for a hoax threat
- 474.17 Using a carriage service to menace, harass or cause offence
- 474.18 Improper use of emergency call service
- 474.19 Using a carriage service for child pornography material
- 474.20 Possessing, controlling, producing, supplying or obtaining child pornography material for use through a carriage service
- 474.21 Defences in respect of child pornography material
- 474.22 Using a carriage service for child abuse material
- 474.23 Possessing, controlling, producing, supplying or obtaining child abuse material for use through a carriage service
- 474.24 Defences in respect of child abuse material
- 474.25 Obligations of Internet service providers and Internet content hosts
- 474.26 Using a carriage service to procure persons under 16 years of age
- 474.27 Using a carriage service to “groom” persons under 16 years of age
- 474.28 Provisions relating to offences against sections 474.26 and 474.27
- 474.29 Defences to offences against section 474.26 or 474.27
Furthermore, resolving harassment cases can be very complicated as it is not always easy to provide sufficient evidence especially when attackers are anonymous and located in other towns or countries. Bains Cohen LLP Solicitors (2011) identified a recent case which involved an internet savvy person who created intimidating blogs and websites against a victim who was jailed after being convicted of online harassment however it took police at least 18 months to track down the attacker, and even then, the harmful comments remained online as it was still difficult for the police to have the content removed. As a matter of fact, due to the enormous publicity related to the court case, the blogs and websites received even more attention causing even more distress to the victim. Ogilvie (2000) points out that in the case of attackers and victims being located in different countries or cities, it becomes difficult to determine which jurisdiction to apply to a case making justice and the resolution of problems very complicated.
Identifying the Offender
Identification is the key issue in that most people who have had a telecommunications service connected as a post pay service are familiar with having to produce some for of identification to obtain the service as credit is involved. Whilst this has been a somewhat reliable source of information for law enforcement in the past, it was not without its flaws. Some of the issues facing telecommunication companies and law enforcement are:
- False identification being produced.
- Having another person apply for the service (sometimes with an unknown person for a cash fee)
- Corruption within the sales department of the telecommunication service whereby identification is not verified as per company guidelines.
- Store clerk error in recording identification details.
All of the above lead to telecommunication services being provided to persons where identity is not adequately recorded if recorded at all.
Information also suggests that the ‘black market’ for untracebale SIM cards is ‘rife’ in Australia and the United States and these SIM cards are being connected onto networks at an alarming rate and could be facilitating criminal activity across all levels from petty street crimes and harassment to organized crime rackets involving drug importations and distribution, murder andkidnapping.
A major issue with law enforcement is how mobile telecommunications devices use a dynamic Internet Protocol (IP) as opposed to a static IP. (Zytrax 2012) As the names imply Static IP addresses are the same every time you connect with Dynamic IP addresses having the ability to change each time a person connects to the Internet. Dynamic IP addresses are the normal customer access method used by most ISPs or Service Providers. When using dynamic IP addresses, even if you are permanently connected (always-on) some ISPs/Service Providers change dynamic IP addresses every 24 hours, others change less frequently (monthly or even longer in certain cases).
Additionally, some persons may use internet cafes and register emails at Yahoo and the like from there where they then conduct the online harassment, whilst some persons scour the suburbs for ‘open’ wireless networks to gain access to ‘wifi’ connections from outside the premises. Such activity leads investigators to the usually ‘Static IP’ address and therefore allowing the person total anomoninity.
Resources
Like with all policing, success comes down to solid investigative work and with all of the aforementioned issues identified the proliferation of social media accounts and the ease they can be created both here and offshore combined with law enforcement agencies having to do more with less it is no wonder cyber bullying, harassment and the like is on the increase. Whilst law enforcement agencies have proactively created ‘computer crime units’ and national ‘High Tech Crime’ sections, front line police need better training and advice with regards to the ever changing world of ‘computer’ related crime.
Connectivity is a way of life now for all persons almost from the age of 4 years of age if not younger and an important part of our daily lives and with such reliance comes ‘familiarity’ and instances where our most vulnerable let their guard down and it is here we need to protect them with investigating and prosecuting persons who use the internet for illicit means.
Maybe, time has come for some civil action to be taken against perpetrators of internet based crime and start having monetary penalties applied.
References:
Alba, Anna. (2012). Social Networks: the rise of online harrassment. Retreived from http://networkconference.netstudies.org/2012/socialnetworksonlineharassment/
Alcindor, Y. (2012, March 19). Lesson of Rutgerscase: Online actions carry consequences. USA Today. Retrieved from http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-03-16/rutgers/53574554/1
Bains Cohen LLP Solicitors. (2011). Internet Law Experts: Online harassment, online intimidation and the criminal justice system. Shall I Report Online Harassment To The Police? Retrieved from http://www.bainscohen.com/online-harassment-online-intimidation
Day, E. (2012, March 11). The hurt caused by private lives being made public. The Observer. Retrieved from http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/mar/11/elizabeth-day-cyberbullying-social-media?newsfeed=true
Meloy, J. & Gothard, S. (1995). A Demographic and Clinical Comparison of Obsessional Followers and Offenders with Mental Disorders, American Journal of Psychiatry, 152, 258–63.
Miller, D. (2010, March 10). The Darker Side of Facebook: Cyber-Bullying. Australian Women Online. Retrieved from http://www.australianwomenonline.com/the-darker-side-of-facebook/
Neo. (2011, January 3). How to Handle Online Harassment & Cyber Stalking. Retrieved from http://thepizzy.net/blog/2011/01/how-to-handle-online-harassment-cyber-stalking/
Ogilvie, E. (2000). Cyberstalking. Australian Institute of Technology. Retrieved from http://www.aic.gov.au/documents/4/7/A/%7B47A7FA60-8EBF-498A-BB9E-D61BC512C053%7Dti166.pdf
Postmedia News. (2012, March 24). Online bullying is now everyone’s problem. Retrieved from http://www.canada.com/Online+bullying+everyone+problem/6353905/story.html
Sreedevi, K. (2012, March 25). Beware! E-mafia is at work on social media. DECCAN Chronicle. Retrieved from http://www.deccanchronicle.com/channels/cities/chennai/beware-e-mafia-work-social-media-439
Stone, D. M. (1999). Online Harassment. Urbana, IL: University Laboratory High School. Retrieved from http://www.ed.uiuc.edu/wp/crime/harassment.htm
Wylie, M. (2007). Online Family Safety – Eight ways to handle cyber-bullies. Retrieved from http://www.yoursecurityresource.com/cobrand/in/articles/cyberbullies/index.html
Zytrax (2012). Retrieved from http://www.zytrax.com/isp/faqs/static.htm
This is icon for social networking website. This is part of Open Icon Library’s webpage icon package. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Can Interpol Cleanse Australia’s Internet Content?
The current government for over seven years has stated that Internet Service Provider (“ISP”) filtering is a key component of the Australian Government’s cybersafety plan. Filtering of online material at the ISP level reflects the view that ISPs should take some responsibility for enabling the blocking of such content on the internet.
This is consistent with the recent child online protection guidelines issued by the International Telecommunications Union. The guidelines state that the strategic objective for the internet industry for child internet safety should be to reduce the availability of, and restrict access to, harmful or illegal content and conduct.
ISP-level content filtering is already occurring in other countries, including Canada, Denmark, Finland, Norway, Sweden and the United Kingdom and the government wanted to ensure a similar level of protection for internet users in Australia.
So, what internet content falls within ISP-level content filtering?
ISP-level filtering of Refused Classification Material
Several years ago the government announced that it will introduce legislative amendments to require all ISPs in Australia to use ISP-level filtering to block overseas hosted Refused Classification (RC) material on the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) RC Content list.
As reported on the Department of Broadband Communications and the Digital Economy web site, content is defined under the National Classification Scheme as Refused Classification (“RC”) and includes child sexual abuse imagery, bestiality, sexual violence, detailed instruction in crime, violence or drug use and/or material that advocates the doing of a terrorist act.
The RC Content list was to be based on public complaints to the Australian Communication Management Authority (“ACMA”) and assessed using existing criteria set out in the National Classification Scheme.
ACMAin one of its roles, liaise with highly reputable overseas organisations to identify lists of child abuse material suitable for incorporation into the RC Content list, following a detailed assessment by the ACMA of the processes used to compile those lists.
The Australian newspaper on November 10 2012, reported in an article titled ‘Mandatory web filter ‘would never have worked’, where the Coalition and the Greens said that: “LABOR was forced to abandon its promised mandatory internet filter because it would never have worked and would not have passed through parliament.”
It was further reported in The Australian that the Communications Minister Stephen Conroy dumped the proposed filter five years after it was promised by Labor, following an outcry from civil libertarians and technology businesses.
He said the government instead would force internet service providers to block sites on Interpol’s “worst of” child-abuse list.
“Given this successful outcome, the government has no need to proceed with mandatory filtering legislation,” Senator Conroy said.
The minister said the decision was in line with a 2010 Australian Law Reform Commission recommendation that the government’s previous internet “black list” was too wide and did not reflect community expectations.
So where does that leave us now? Cyber Guardians Online will be reviewing the outcomes of this monumental ‘backflip’ and will be featuring some legislative analysis of where ISP’s are now positioned.
Furthermore, Cyber Guardians Online will assess if Australia’s adoption of the 2009 INTERPOL General Assembly Resolution (AG-2009 Res-05), a Resolution that limits the online distribution of child sexual abuse images whilst encouraging member countries to promote the use of all the technical tools available, including access blocking of websites containing child sexual abuse images is sufficient in preventing such images being accessed in Australia.
As INTERPOL is tasked with leading this work by providing a list of domains containing the websites that disseminate the most severe child abuse material worldwide where they work in tandem with international police forces in the construction of the “Worst of”-list of domains, Australia needs to ensure that all internet users are protected from explicit images and content.
Cyber Bullying Is A Crime
Welcome to Cyber Guardians Online (CGOL) inauguaral blog where we wish to clarify the broadly used term of ‘Cyber Bullying’
MORE TO COME
Bradley W. Deacon
