Firms target of e-mail scams

November 23, 2009
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Law firms are being warned that they are the target of “spear phishing” e-mails. The FBI sent out an advisory last week which said that it believed hackers were targeting U.S. law firms and public relations firms.

The hackers are spear phishing – sending unwanted e-mails that appear to be from someone the recipient knows. Traditional phishing e-mails are usually easily identified because they are from names you don’t recognize, or even random characters strung together.

By doing this, it’s more likely for someone to open the message and then click on the links attached. Of course, we know it’s the links that are the dangerous part of phishing scams and the FBI says clicking on the link or opening the attachment will launch a self-executing file. That file, “through a variety of malicious processes,” will attempt to download another file, according to the advisory. The attachments aren’t always .exe files, which are typically some kind of software or program, but may appear to be zip files or photos.

The FBI doesn’t say what info the hackers are looking for or how badly a firm’s computer system and information could be compromised. In fact, there’s apparently no reliable way to know whether the incoming message is a scam.

The lesson for firms: if you are unsure of the e-mail, better safe than sorry in clicking on any links or opening attachments. Perhaps a phone call to the alleged sender would also help clear up any confusion.

Also, how much is too much information put on computer networks? With the push to reduce paperwork, information that was once housed in the firm is now potentially available to anyone with the means of hacking into the system. Law firms contain a mountain of personal information – both on employees and clients. Breaking into a firm’s data system could be a hacker’s dream.

Any firms here in Indiana receive these spear phishing e-mails? How often do you receive scam e-mails and how can you tell if they are real?
ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. Major social engineering imposed by judicial order well in advance of democratic change, has been the story of the whole post ww2 period. Contraception, desegregation, abortion, gay marriage: all rammed down the throats of Americans who didn't vote to change existing laws on any such thing, by the unelected lifetime tenure Supreme court heirarchs. Maybe people came to accept those things once imposed upon them, but, that's accommodation not acceptance; and surely not democracy. So let's quit lying to the kids telling them this is a democracy. Some sort of oligarchy, but no democracy that's for sure, and it never was. A bourgeois republic from day one.

  2. JD Massur, yes, brings to mind a similar stand at a Texas Mission in 1836. Or Vladivostok in 1918. As you seemingly gloat, to the victors go the spoils ... let the looting begin, right?

  3. I always wondered why high fence deer hunting was frowned upon? I guess you need to keep the population steady. If you don't, no one can enjoy hunting! Thanks for the post! Fence

  4. Whether you support "gay marriage" or not is not the issue. The issue is whether the SCOTUS can extract from an unmentionable somewhere the notion that the Constitution forbids government "interference" in the "right" to marry. Just imagine time-traveling to Philadelphia in 1787. Ask James Madison if the document he and his fellows just wrote allowed him- or forbade government to "interfere" with- his "right" to marry George Washington? He would have immediately- and justly- summoned the Sergeant-at-Arms to throw your sorry self out into the street. Far from being a day of liberation, this is a day of capitulation by the Rule of Law to the Rule of What's Happening Now.

  5. With today's ruling, AG Zoeller's arguments in the cases of Obamacare and Same-sex Marriage can be relegated to the ash heap of history. 0-fer

ADVERTISEMENT