If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...
- Juul Rented A Scientific Journal For a Month To Spread Glorified Marketing
- Scammers Use The Public's Fear Of Copyright Culture To Trick People Into Installing Malware
- Republicans Using Incredibly Sketchy And Manipulative 'Dark Patterns' To Dupe People Into Donating Way More Than Intended
- Whistleblower Says AT&T Has Been Ripping Off US Schools For A Decade
- Employees Say Foxconn & Donald Trump's Wisconsin Factory Scam Was An Absurdist Hellscape
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No wonder we can't keep our privacy anymore.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Privacy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
pretexting?
Please - refuse to use euphemisms when it comes to politics and legal issues.
Some examples:
genocide = ethnic cleansing (how sanitary it sounds)
fraud = pretexting (sounds like some kind of "text messaging" doesn't it?)
The rest of my post is from an article by Daniel Pipes about euphemisms at:
http://www.danielpipes.org/article/2066
------------------------
The press, however, generally shies away from the word terrorist, preferring euphemisms. Take the assault that led to the deaths of some 400 people, many of them children, in Beslan, Russia, on September 3. Journalists have delved deep into their thesauruses, finding at least twenty euphemisms for terrorists:
Assailants - National Public Radio.
Attackers - the Economist.
Bombers - the Guardian.
Captors - the Associated Press.
Commandos - Agence France-Presse refers to the terrorists both as "membres du
commando" and "commando."
Criminals - the Times (London).
Extremists - United Press International.
Fighters - the Washington Post.
Group - the Australian.
Guerrillas: in a New York Post editorial.
Gunmen - Reuters.
Hostage-takers - the Los Angeles Times.
Insurgents - in a New York Times headline.
Kidnappers - the Observer (London).
Militants - the Chicago Tribune.
Perpetrators - the New York Times.
Radicals - the BBC.
Rebels - in a Sydney Morning Herald headline.
Separatists - the Christian Science Monitor.
And my favorite:
Activists - the Pakistan Times.
---------------------------------------
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: pretexting?
There's euphamisms and there's accuracy. Pretexting has a pretty clear definition that describes fraud, but using "fraud" alone is not particularly descriptive. So, I believe that pretexting is a perfectly good word.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: pretexting?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
re
All Social Engineering techniques are based on flaws in human logic known as cognitive biases. These bias flaws are used in various combinations to create attack techniques.
Pretexting
Pretexting is the act of creating and using an invented scenario (the pretext) to obtain information from a target, usually over the telephone. It is more than a simple lie, as it regularly involves some prior research and the use of pieces of known information (e.g., Birthday, Social Security Number, last bill amount) to establish legitimacy in the mind of the target.
The purpose is often to trick a business into disclosing customer information, and is used by private investigators to obtain telephone records, utility records, banking records and other information directly from junior company service representatives. The information can then be used to establish even greater legitimacy under tougher questioning with a manager (e.g., to make account changes, get specific balances, etc).
As most U.S. companies still authenticate a client by asking only for a Social Security Number, Birthday, or Mother's maiden name — all of which are easily obtained from public records — the method is extremely effective and will likely continue to work well until a more stringent identification method is adopted.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]