An international operation led by the United States caught a group of cyber criminals spearheading the largest cyber crime ring yet, one that infected approximately 500,000 to one million PCs globally. The group of cyber criminals, allegedly led by Russian national Evgeniy Mikhaylovich Bogachev who went by the aliases “lucky12345” and “slavic,” stole approximately $100 million from individuals and businesses worldwide starting in 2007. The botnet, which is a group of infected computers under the control of someone other than their owners, went by the name GOZ, short for Gameover Zeus, and mainly targeted bank accounts and credentials. A couple of notable targeted by GOZ are Bank of Georgetown and Capital One.

Their main goal was to monetize the investment they made into getting into your machine, they were absolutely after dollars, pounds and euros.

-Dell Employee Don Smith

How did Gameover Zeus do it?

Generally, the GOZ hackers ensnared targets and obtained secure information by using infected emails via a process known as “phishing.” Computer users would receive legitimate-looking email messages claiming to be from a trusted bank stating that there was a problem with one of their prior financial transactions. Once the computer owner unknowingly downloaded the malware after opening the email and clicking a link, it began a targeted search for financial information stored on the machine. The Gameover Zeus virus was initially spread by one of the largest botnets known called Cutwail, which popped up on the cybercrime scene in 2007 and is mostly involved with sending email messages containing viruses. In 2009, the Cutwail botnet contained the largest known number of infected machines.

The cyber crime ring also distributed malware called CryptoLocker, a form of what is known as ransomware, which makes data of a computer inaccessible to its user, claiming to only unlock their machine after receiving payment of as much as $700. The GOZ botnet in particular was so tricky to take down due to various components- namely, its advanced ability to hide the location of its servers via data encryption.

The Demise of the Crime Ring

Members of several organizations worldwide including the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Intel Corp, Carnegie Mellon University and Microsoft Corp had been tracking the activity of GOZ since it first appeared on the scene in 2007, well before they were able to take action and put an end to their criminal operations. The monitoring of the cybercrime ring was completely secretive until they commenced “Operation Tovar,” which shut down the operations of the computers involved in spreading the viruses. United States organizations, mainly the FBI and the aforementioned companies, collaborated with Europol and the UK’s National Crime Agency to initiate a virtual ambush on Gameover Zeus. Authorities ended the cybercrime ring’s operations by shutting down the servers they were using to control the computers infected with its viruses.

Bogachev, believed to be the ringleader of the GOZ operation, is thought to be residing in Russia and has been added to the FBI’s Cyber Most Wanted List. Various publications including the International Business Times warned residents of the UK that despite the ending of the operations of the cybercrime ring, they may be able to regroup within two weeks and begin infecting machines once again. To keep their machines safe from future cyber attacks, experts urge computer users to install or update their security software and change passwords on important accounts.

—

Marisa Mostek (@MarisaJ44) loves globetrotting and writing, so she is living the dream by writing while living abroad in Japan and working as an English teacher. Marisa received her undergraduate degree from the University of Colorado in Boulder and a certificate in journalism from UCLA. Contact Marisa at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured Image Courtesy of [geralt via Pixabay]

Marisa Mostek

Marisa Mostek loves globetrotting and writing, so she is living the dream by writing while living abroad in Japan and working as an English teacher. Marisa received her undergraduate degree from the University of Colorado in Boulder and a certificate in journalism from UCLA. Contact Marisa at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post World’s Largest Cyber Crime Ring Disbanded appeared first on Law Street.

The Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) recently released a report with a stunning conclusion: people are losing more money to internet scammers than ever before. In its 14th year of operation, the IC3 released the 2013 Internet Crime Report, which shows a “48.8 percent increase in reported losses since 2012.”

What are these crimes, who are they targeting, and what is causing the sudden surge in reported losses?

What is the IC3?

The IC3 is a partnership between the  Federal Bureau of Investigation and the National White Collar Crime Center (NWC3). It acts as a reporting mechanism for victims of online crime as well as a resource for law enforcement at many levels. Each year it releases a detailed annual report on cybercrime.

In the 2013 report the IC3 stated, “criminals continue to use a variety of scams to defraud Internet users,” making it clear that the online crime picture is a diverse one. It’s important to analyze precisely for this reason. There were 262,813 complaints received, of which roughly half of the victims reported financial loss. These losses totaled almost $800 million.

What are the Cybercrimes?

The 2013 report breaks down the different types and methods of cybercrimes. Vehicle fraud, for example, is one of the most prevalent forms. Trying to buy cars from scammers has cost over 1,400 people an average of $3,640 per incident. Perpetrators who pose as FBI agents have cost victims $6,348,881 in total. Cybercriminals can also defraud victims by pretending to sell real estate, producing ransomware or scareware, and even threatening to carry out jobs as hit men.

Surprisingly, romance scamming has caused the highest average losses for its victims. These scams involve a falsified online romantic relationship and cost the average victim about $12,756. By professing love and enticing victims to send financial assistance, romance scammers generally target “people aged 40 years and older, divorced, widowed, disabled, and often elderly,” the report said.

The targets of cybercrimes are primarily middle-aged. For years now the largest demographic has been the 40-59 year old age group, consistently making up over 40 percent of victims of online crime. The extreme age demographics, those under 20 and over 60, are both affected much less, as they make up just over 3 percent and just over 15 percent of victims, respectively. One possible explanation is that those who have grown up with the internet navigate its criminal spaces more carefully, while many of the elderly are simply not online.

What has been happening with Cybercrime?

Although each demographics’ share of cybercrime victims has remained relatively stable, the reported losses have been far from static. An increase of almost 50 percent from 2012 to 2013 demonstrates a wildly changing environment for online crime. While this spike may suggest that the IC3 has been receiving more complaints, its reports indicate otherwise. Each listed demographic actually reported fewer complaints in the previous year. Financial losses per complaint must be rising.

While there was nearly a 22 percent decrease from the number of complaints in 2009 to 2013, the IC3’s reported losses rose from $559.7 million in 2009 to over $781.8 million in 2013. Among those who reported any financial loss, the average loss increased from about $5,500 to well over $6,000 between 2009 and 2013. It seems as though the increased reported losses do not reflect a greater public knowledge of the IC3 and an increased number of reports. Instead, the decrease in actual complaints coupled with the increase in average reported losses suggests that internet scamming may be more lucrative than it has ever been.

As are all sources of criminal information, the IC3 is limited. It relies on the victim filing a complaint through the IC3, and as with all crimes, many cases will go unreported. Unfortunately, it stands alone in its domain. Other data collection systems like the Uniform Crime Reports aggregate data from law enforcement agencies, not from the victims themselves. The National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) uses surveys to determine victimization, but does not focus on internet crime. It asks young people about cyber bullying and has compiled a report specifically on identity theft. Aside from these questions, it appears that the NCVS fails to collect information about cybercrime. However if, cybercrime is paying more, then the IC3 and similar programs should be supported as much as possible.

[IC3 Report]

—

Jake Ephros (@JakeEphros)

Featured image courtesy of [EP Technology via Flickr]

Jake Ephros

Jake Ephros is a native of Montclair, New Jersey where he volunteered for political campaigns from a young age. He studies Political Science, Economics, and Philosophy at American University and looks forward to a career built around political activism, through journalism, organizing, or the government. Contact Jake at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Who Said (Cyber)crime Doesn’t Pay? appeared first on Law Street.

On February 15, 2014, an Australian Programmer put a hacked version of a popular 90s video game–Pokemon Red/Blue–on a video streaming and sharing site called Twitch. Then, he let everyone join in on the fun. By visiting the site and creating a free login, you can control the game. Well, sort of. You can control the game along with thousands of other people by cooperating all together to type in the right commands.

Pokemon Red/Blue is a relatively simple game. It’s in black and white, has rudimentary graphics, and there’s really only a handful of controls.

There are two modes in which the users can play the game–Anarchy, or Democracy, and both are fascinating for their own reasons.

Anarchy is pretty much exactly what it sounds like. Everyone’s inputs are immediately entered into the system, if applicable, meaning that the character is being controlled by thousands of separate people at once. It renders a sort of puppet like effect–the character has the potential to be dragged in many directions.

Democracy is much more difficult. If the players decide on Democracy, everyone has 20 seconds to input a command, and then the most popular command will be chosen.

But what I think is most interesting is what it takes to switch between the two modes. In order to get from Democracy to Anarchy, 50 percent of users need to vote for Anarchy. To get from Anarchy to Democracy, 80 percent of users need to vote for Democracy.

This sounds simple, but you have to realize that so far, an estimated 650,000 total users have participated, and up to 120,000, maybe more, at the same time. Meaning that at any given time, thousands of users need to think and do the same thing. Most of these users appear to be located in the United States and Australia, but this phenomenon has reached all over the globe. Obviously, no one has been awake for the entire time that TwitchPlaysPokemon has been alive, so users jump on and off when they want, and usually by country. When I checked out TwitchPlaysPokemon this morning, I saw multiple, presumably North American, users saying they needed to log off and head to work.

Based on the Reddit thread dedicated to TwitchPlaysPokemon, there’s been a battle between Democracy and Anarchy, with different users preferring one of the modes for whatever reason. Over the course of what appears to be 16 minutes early this morning, the game switched from Anarchy, to Democracy, to Anarchy again.

There’s also been a ton of memes born out of TwitchPlaysPokemon. There are, for lack of a better term, religious symbols that have developed and now exist as their own inside jokes. For example, there’s an item that can be obtained called the Helix Fossil. It’s pretty much utterly useless, but it was often accidentally selected by the players. So, they would say they “turned to the Helix Fossil for guidance,” creating a facetious Helix Fossil cult. There are many others, jokes created out of this shared experience that have taken on meanings for those who participate in the game, but mean very little to the outside observer.

So, is TwitchPlaysPokemon just a silly group game, or can we see some deeper significance? The players of the game have made progress. Slow, halting, messy progress, but progress all the same. As of Friday, they were roughly halfway through the game, and they certainly advanced further over the weekend. If nothing else, TwitchPlaysPokemon is proof that a group of completely unorganized people can work together, albeit in pursuit of a very narrow goal.

There’s something fascinating about watching it. While writing this article, I’ve had the site up on my computer, and what I find most interesting is that while many users are interested in controlling the game, more of the commands are either “Democracy” or “Anarchy.” It’s sort of beautifully discordant, because even though everyone has the same goal, they fight over how to do it.

TwitchPlaysPokemon is an excellent social experiment, despite the fact that was not its intended purpose. After all, where else can you actually see the fight between anarchy and democracy play out without consequences? Where else can you see groupthink mentality at both its finest and its most destructive? Where else can you see a new society, complete with religious symbols, born from scratch? If you have a few minutes, go watch TwitchPlaysPokemon. It’s worth a look.

Featured image courtesy of [Nicolas Fuentes via Flickr]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post TwitchPlaysPokemon: The Ultimate Social Experiment appeared first on Law Street.