A Fire Department that I volunteered with in Rockville, MD was scammed out of a three-quarter-mil. vendor payment for a state-of-the-art Rescue Squad/Ambulance because of a hijacked email chain. I wonder if it was this crew.
So there's someone back and forth in an email chain with someone from Big Ambulance Inc negotiating price and agree to proceed with sale and then what?
When I was in IT our company would get emails from slight mis-spellings of our domain name claiming to be our CEO, CFO. Our vendors would also routinely get hacked and the hackers would send emails from the vendor's legit email clients/network requesting we change how we paid them.
This sounds like what happens with Hotels.com where the hotel you just booked with said there was an issue with the payment that was submitted, and you must pay with this alternate payment method instead -- it turns out the hotel's account had been compromised and the thief/scumbag/scammer does this to all the hotel's bookings. The one we got a message from, apparently the respective hotel keeps having this happen over and over. My guess is the outdated computer they use has a keylogger or trojan on it and their accounts will just be forever compromised. Fun times.
I did some contract work for a major hotel chain a few years ago (Windows 2012 server upgrades) and was horrified by their utter lack of security everywhere. Everything was out of date, no patching, super simple admin passwords everywhere. It was crazy. They did have corporate level IT, but from what I remember, it wasn't for any infra, just their hotel related software.
Don't connect to hotel wifi, or if you do, don't do anything important on it.
~10 years ago, the big hotel brands (IHG/Hilton/Marriott/Hyatt) required their franchisees to install professional networking equipment from vendors like Cisco Meraki or Aruba, to be managed externally by one of the brand's approved network managers (e.g. WorldVue).
Reminds me some years ago at a company retreat at one of those brands, where we wanted to checks the OpSec of the hotel we were staying at, so I went up to the hotel lobby desk, said I was $NAME_OF_CEO and I had lost my hotel room key and my wallet is in the room, and they straight up gave a new card to me, without any sort of verification at all.
I had the same experience as the other person that replied to you. At the front desk - "Hi, I'm here to do some IT work, is manager around?" "Oh the server room is around the corner, it's unlocked." Didn't need the root esxi password because the IP and password were stuck to the sever with a sticky note.
In my friend’s case, they monitored a compromised email account for months.
They then set up filters to hide a certain large incoming invoice via filters, and replaced it with the same thing but with a different routing number for the transaction.
A month later that vendor starts sending dunning notices, to everyone’s confusion. $90k gone.
And then somebody sends you an invoice, they aren’t who you think they are, and you wire their bank account to pay the invoice. They remove the money from their account, hide its origins through various laundering methods, and move on.
This is a very common event. Anglo American sent $17M to an email scammer years ago but it happens constantly in America too. We had to build a ton of detectors to eliminate this type of fraud for our customers at OpenEnvoy. Bank details, email metadata, character/symbol swap verification. All sorts of things to just keep this one very common thing from happening.
I'm not sure the FBI will even exist in four years. It only takes an Elon Musk investigation leaking to Twitter and his minions can just defund the police.
its almost fun how bad they operated and how shit their softwares really seems if read this. i say almost only because of their victims... if it wasnt crime this would read like a comedy... :s.
its terrible how even bad... bad actors .. can make such big successes. :/ glad some shit got seized but it will likely oy be a minor dent in what they do. they dont give shits because they know they dont need to. thats a sad state considering the massive losses of their victims
1. I think it’s also fair to say that since the interview, Mark Rutte has come out and said that NATO countries need to increase their spending to be able to protect themselves. Countries like Poland, Sweden, and Lithuania (possibly more, though I haven’t followed this closely) have shared the same opinion. Paraphrasing Tusk's comments, wanting your allies to be stronger can hardly be considered a hostile move.
2. The only thing to add here is that, over time, this has morphed from “not ruling out the use of force” to “threatening the use of force.” Either way, I agree, it’s not a good look.
3. To counterbalance, the EU has been using US tech companies as a piggy bank for many years now, yet that hasn’t hindered collaboration between the US and Europe.
NATO isn’t dead but is likely only going to grow stronger. FVEY will probably continue, especially on initiatives where everyone stands to benefit.
> the EU has been using US tech companies as a piggy bank for many years now,
Ouch ouch... I have to tell you that you got this backwards. Those tech companies are very happy to hoard billions of dollars from EU citizens. The problem is more that they don't like competition and have utmost disrespect for human rights like privacy. There were lawsuits for the very basic thing of ANTI-COMPETITIVE behavior.
The real tragedy US people do not even know anymore what a healthy, competitive economy does entail. US companies do not like to compete, they like to kill competition.
I did not even mention they facilitate illegal stuff, poison society with disinformation and function as a springboard for adversary states. Those slaps on the wrist were a shame. Google, Apple and MS should have had received a ban for 20 years, but the EU has been to late to decouple, and now they find themselves in the grip of tech oligarchs.
(Luckily, some of them are also openly nazi-supporters, otherwise the Afd would miss some keynote speakers).
Nice story, but it doesn’t really match the reality I’ve seen.
One example: I was involved in the implementation of Article 15/17 at one of the FAANG companies. Throughout the process, we had many meetings with governmental bodies in the EU and, specifically, with the European CMOs (many of these are government controlled in Europe). It was clear as day that all they wanted from us was to pay up. It was literal extortion and had nothing to do with helping the "creatives" or fair competition or anything else.
Man, that sounds unfair. If I would be the owner of a FAANG company, I would tell the EU to fuck themselves instead of using them as a piggy bank. Why do those FAANG companies still want to do business there? It almost sounds like the EU wants companies to pay taxes and fines if they violate the law.
An alternative theory is that you were not in every relevant meeting.
I am sorry for the sarcasm, but I totally don't buy it. And you understand why.
> I would tell the EU to fuck themselves instead of using them as a piggy bank. Why do those FAANG companies still want to do business there?
Maybe because no one makes business decisions based on emotions? The situation could be unfair but you might still choose to continue to engage just because it's beneficial for the company for all other reasons. All things considered, they still make money in that region, maybe not as much as they would have made otherwise.
> An alternative theory is that you were not in every relevant meeting.
I'm telling you what we heard directly from the gov agencies and you're saying that I wasn't in the right meetings? Maybe, but I at least have some first-hand knowledge to share here and not just snarky comments.
> I am sorry for the sarcasm, but I totally don't buy it. And you understand why.
No, I don't understand why and I'm not very interested in continuing this conversation either. You don't seem to have much to add it.
Well, let me be clear. No government can extort you here. There are laws. If you found the government agency in violation of the law, you should take it to the right court.
(A FAANG company usually has a lawyer or two. In an extreme case a fine would have been handled as a settlement for a complex series of violations by the company. The FAANG lawyer would understand it if the company still had a case or not. We know that FAANG companies have been in violation of various laws. Maybe FAANG got lucky and got a deal. That is unfair, I think a market access ban for several years is more fair for all people. The EU doesn't have a Trump. What you experienced was most likely competent and educated personnel from its executive branch. But you did not understand what your company did wrong. Hate me now, thank me later for giving a reality check.)
Where are you getting this NATO target of 5% of GDP?
>...In 2006, NATO Defence Ministers agreed to commit a minimum of 2% of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) to defence spending to continue to ensure the Alliance's military readiness.
>...The combined wealth of the non-US Allies, measured in GDP, is almost equal to that of the United States. However, non-US Allies together spend less than half of what the United States spends on defence.
Trump has a high statistical odds of dieing before the end of his term because of old age. (I doubt anyone will assassinate him, but that is also possible for any leader of a country). There will be more changes in administration - there always are.
On the other hand the president has basically medical staff on standby all the time just for them with the quickest humanly possible access to any and every medical advancement in existence.
And keeping old people limping along for as long as possible is one thing US medical care is great at, so long as they can pay for it. If it takes $1,000,000 per week to keep them alive, as long as the check clears they will move heaven and earth to keep them going, and the president effectively has infinite medical care credit through the state.
There is no statistical evidence of this when compared to presidents and not the general public. Seems like most presidents after World War 2 live a very long time if they are not assassinated.
I'm not quite sure how to calculate these statistics, but as I read the charts, it looks like someone his age has about a 25% chance of dieing in the next 4 years. Even in the worst (best?) case, he has near zero change of 25 more years, which means most reading this will outlive him.
The 4 post-WWII ex-presidents who outlived Trump circa 2028 (Bush Sr, Reagan, Ford, Carter) were all notable for their health and athleticism, which Trump isn't.
I would not say that Reagan, who famously developed Alzheimer’s while in office, was notable for his health. But he was already fairly old when he took office.
>...In 1989, just a few months after he completed his second term as president, Reagan underwent surgery to drain a subdural hematoma caused by a fall from a horse in Mexico. Such brain injury can increase the likelihood of developing Alzheimer’s disease or perhaps even cause it.
> I doubt anyone will assassinate him, but that is also possible for any leader of a country
After the incidents during the campaign I imagine Trump is very paranoid, mostly stays safely indoors and minimizes time in public. I haven't heard anyone say so but I suspected that was one reason he had an indoor inauguration (along with the other reasons people speculated about).
Maybe from straight actuarial tables, but those don't take into account Trump's incredible wealth, immediate access to the greatest doctors in the world, nor the fact that his parents lived until 88 & 93 years old.
Edit: actually, even actuarial tables give a 78 year old a 50% chance of living another 9 years.
If I were one of such doctors, I'd stay the hell away. Apart from the reputational damage of helping someone who advocated for injecting bleach, there is the fact that they just won't get paid. Trump stiffs all his contractors.
I don't think he's going to die in office (which wouldn't help much anyway; if anything, it would mean "instant canonisation" and weeks of TV programs extolling his virtues). I think it's sad that this is where most of the thinking population of the US is: hoping for the old dictator to die, like some African or South American backwater.
That's… a very naive take imo. Wilders is a far-right populist like Trump, and they have many other similarities, but they also have some very crucial differences. A very important one being that Trump is a figure-head leader but actually a puppet of other forces, while Wilders avoids being prime minister at all costs so he can keep playing the role of a reactionary politician complaining about bad leadership while making everyone dependent on him.
If you still are not noticing how quickly Trump changes his mind on literally anything depending on who is prepared to pay him, then no "specific" argument I can make will convince you otherwise. So I'm not in the mood to waste either of our time "debating" this here.
