Phishing: From AOL to Twitter (and points in-between)

by Kathy Gill on 25 February 2010

in Twitter Tips

The act of fishing, accor­ding to Texas State Rep. Aaron Pena, can be desc­ri­bed as “slow, metho­di­cal and patient.” The act of phishing, on the other hand, can be desc­ri­bed as metho­di­cal, patient and unscrupulous.

The first time I saw the word phishing, I did not imme­dia­tely think of phrea­king (hac­king a telephone sys­tem). I thought it was a cle­ver “res­pe­lling” of the word “fishing” since the two verbs share a com­mon theme: to seek to obtain something indi­rectly or by arti­fice.

Phishing was first desc­ri­bed in a paper in 1987 and first men­tio­ned online in 1996 in an Ame­ri­caOn­line news­group. Four­teen years later, phishing has spread from the rela­ti­vely clo­sed gar­den of AOL ins­tant mes­sa­ging to semi-closed gar­dens like Face­book and wide-open spa­ces like email and Twit­ter. Almost all online defi­ni­tions of phishing desc­ribe it as an email-based scheme.

The lan­guage of the phisher seems rela­ti­vely unchan­ged. On AOL in the 1990s, phishers would directly ask poen­tial vic­tims to “verify your account” or “con­firm billing infor­ma­tion.” This week, they are indi­rectly asking us for our Twit­ter login cre­den­tials. The phisher pro­vi­des a link to login page that looks like Twit­ter, unless we exa­mine the URL visi­ble in the address bar. The unsus­pec­ting click “sign in” and the phisher then uses this newly-acquired access to send the phishing link, as a direct mes­sage, to ever­yone who is follo­wing us.

Clearly, this sys­tem is metho­di­cal. It is, after all, gover­ned by the if-else logic of com­pu­ter code. It is patient: the phisher is con­tent with a very small click-through rate. This is, after all, how real-world viru­ses pro­pa­gate; ever­yone who is expo­sed to a cold or flu virus does not get sick. And it is unsc­ru­pu­lous: the phisher poses as us to our (ini­tially at least) unsus­pec­ting friends.

There is less malice in the current Twit­ter scam than in the Face­book “I’m stran­ded and need money” phi­sing exam­ple. The Twit­ter attack does not seek to directly sepa­rate you from your money and pos­ses­sions. But many peo­ple use the same login cre­den­tials for mul­ti­ple accounts. That same patient com­pu­ter code which now has your Twit­ter ID and pass­word could be used to try to open other accounts: email, online com­merce, banking.

A Plea For Vir­tual Safety
Here are some steps to secure your online identity:

  • Just say no. Be mind­ful before clic­king on links in Tweets, Face­book sta­tus upda­tes and email. Think before clic­king. Use a brow­ser with built-in safety fea­tu­res. For exam­ple, Chrome, Camino and Inter­net Explo­rer war­ned me about the current phishing attack on Twit­ter; howe­ver, neither Fire­fox nor Safari pro­vi­ded a warning.
  • Avoid crea­ting new accounts. When a web­site asks you to create an account, opt ins­tead to login with Face­book, Twit­ter, Ope­nID, Dis­quus, Type­Pad. In other words, use a pree­xis­ting account. If the ori­gi­na­ting web­site only uses Face­book­Con­nect, con­si­der sen­ding them a note asking for choice.
  • Segre­gate login pro­fi­les. The login pro­file for your online ban­king should be subs­tan­tially more secure than one for rea­ding a news site or for com­men­ting on your favo­rite blog or for edi­ting a Wiki­pe­dia entry. I don’t believe that it is rea­so­na­ble to say “create a new pass­word for every account” … because I know you won’t. It is rea­so­na­ble to sug­gest mindfulness.
  • Deve­lop a pass­word stra­tegy. After you’ve thought about the types of pro­fi­les in terms of risk and fre­quency of access, deve­lop a pass­word stra­tegy. For non-monetary accounts like most news sites, Wiki­pe­dia and your favo­rite blog, pick a pass­word that is easy to remem­ber. What is the worst that could hap­pen if someone figu­res out your pass­word to one of these accounts? They’re not going to get your mai­ling address or access to your bank account. In this case, memo­ra­ble is pro­bably more impor­tant than “strong.”
  • Mini­mize dupli­cate ins­tan­ces of the same pass­word when risk goes up. When the ans­wer to “What is the worst that could hap­pen?” inc­lu­des access to per­so­nal or ban­king infor­ma­tion, don’t use the same pass­word for every account. As the risk goes up, make the pass­word more secure. Whine loudly when a ven­dor (like Veri­zon) will not let you create a secure pass­word on their system.
  • Email pass­words should be strong. In a per­fect world, we’d use one email account for all of our finan­cial tran­sac­tions and a dif­fe­rent account for corres­pon­ding with friends and yet third account for mai­ling lists and such. The more that you co-mingle the way you use your email account the grea­ter the risk if the account should get hac­ked. The grea­ter the risk, the more secure the pass­word. Remem­ber that email is often used as the way to reset account passwords!
  • Com­ple­tely segre­gate online ban­king. Your online ban­king pass­word should not be used on any other account.

Now excuse me, please, while I go prac­tice a bit of what I’m preaching.

TweetDeck DM

01. Exam­ple of a Twit­ter Direct Mes­sage Phishing Attack. Ques­tion: Why Hasn

phishing detected

02-Chrome, Camino and Inter­net Explo­rer Detec­ted Phishing

Twitter Phishing

03-Safari and Fire­fox (Mac) Went Straight To False Login Screen

Twitter Phishing

04-Remember To Look At URLs! In This Case, The URL Is A Dead Give-Away

:: This post first appea­red at wired­pen
:: Follow Kathy on Twit­ter!
:: Follow UWT­wit­ter­book on Twitter!

Previous post: What’s The Best URL Shortener?

Next post: 140TC : Twitter Tools