European Debt Recovery (wow, these guys are good!) (1 Viewer)

neuroman9999

Member
Local time
Today, 03:11
Joined
Aug 17, 2020
Messages
827
They've got microsoft office 365, a date/time stamp in the email, and I wonderful sincere message written entirely in bold print. Looks pretty good to me! I'm sure they'll get someone from their efforts, but it won't be me obviously.....

european_debt_recovery_criminals.jpg
 

The_Doc_Man

Immoderate Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Today, 03:11
Joined
Feb 28, 2001
Messages
27,001
Thank you, Adam, for posting a warning of yet another scam. By publishing this in an open forum, we get to alert our users to yet another of the many ways that scammers try to get money out of people.

For those not sure how to know that the above was a scam, may I point out that IF this were an official government office from the UK...

1. They almost certainly would NOT have a .COM domain address. They would have either a .UK domain or a .UK.GOV domain address.

2. The "reply to" would not be a gmail.com address. It would be a .UK.GOV or .UK address. An official office will probably have its own Exchange servers so you might expect to see "Exchange" in the address. Further, you would be able to do a web search for the address to see from where it originated.

3. If Microsoft were actually involved in this, the "signed by" and "via" elements would not include onmicrosoft.com because true messages from or through Microsoft would include .microsoft.com, not some bastardized reference that tries to LOOK like Microsoft is involved. Further, the "signed by" would be a legitimate signer in either the .UK or .UK.GOV domain. TRUST me on this fine point. Official UK offices have the ability and authority to issue their own digital certificates.

4. The real indicator of "wrongness" is that sentence that offers to "guide you through" some process of getting money that you never knew you even were owed. This will be an excuse to get your bank routing number, which will open you up to having your bank account drained to zero.

Thank you for the information, Adam.
 
Last edited:

neuroman9999

Member
Local time
Today, 03:11
Joined
Aug 17, 2020
Messages
827
3. If Microsoft were actually involved in this, the "signed by" and "via" elements would not include onmicrosoft.com because true messages from or through Microsoft would include .microsoft.com, not some bastardized reference that tries to LOOK like Microsoft is involved. Further, the "signed by" would be a legitimate signer in either the .UK or .UK.GOV domain. TRUST me on this fine point. Official UK offices have the ability and authority to issue their own digital certificates.
if one is using MS's office 365 package, the FROM address always says:
via onmicrosoft.com
per the following discussion I had with a professional a long long time ago:

https://www.tenforums.com/browsers-...-connected-email-address-onmicrosoft-com.html

Thank you for the information, Adam.
hey, well what else am I here for!? to quote you: the "bastardized" people on this forum won't let me issue ms access advice. thus, I'm stuck here. I won't say anything about trying to hack my way out of it, primarily because our leader has previously tossed me out for making a comment like that. Maybe I frightened him a bit. but I've told so many people on this Earth that I don't engage in black hat activity, although I'm sure I could give something to that community if I really wanted to. If you were a christian brother Richard, I would have more to say, but alas you are not..... =(
 

The_Doc_Man

Immoderate Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Today, 03:11
Joined
Feb 28, 2001
Messages
27,001
I was able to confirm that .onmicrosoft.com is associated with an O365 custom domain. So I stand corrected at the suspicion of the .onmicrosoft part. HOWEVER, I repeat that any official government office would not use this because they have a domain of their own that would relate to a UK or GOV main domain.
 

neuroman9999

Member
Local time
Today, 03:11
Joined
Aug 17, 2020
Messages
827
I was able to confirm that .onmicrosoft.com is associated with an O365 custom domain. So I stand corrected at the suspicion of the .onmicrosoft part. HOWEVER, I repeat that any official government office would not use this because they have a domain of their own that would relate to a UK or GOV main domain.
speaking of this issue you mentioned, Richard. do you know what's going on in the government of the USA!? take a look at this image. does this make any sense to you!? how could an email originate from outside this government's department if it came from that address!? is google just stupid like always? LOL. what am i missing?


speaking_of_which.jpg
 

The_Doc_Man

Immoderate Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Today, 03:11
Joined
Feb 28, 2001
Messages
27,001
It is possible using advanced methods to have a different Sender vs. From, as for example if the message were sent via CDO rather than Outlook. Though with VBA and an Outlook Application Object, I think that Sender vs. From option also exists. You would have to look at the detailed message header to know the difference.
 

neuroman9999

Member
Local time
Today, 03:11
Joined
Aug 17, 2020
Messages
827
It is possible using advanced methods to have a different Sender vs. From, as for example if the message were sent via CDO rather than Outlook. Though with VBA and an Outlook Application Object, I think that Sender vs. From option also exists. You would have to look at the detailed message header to know the difference.
oh come on Richard! NO ONE in the government of the USA has any damn clue what CDO even is, let alone would have any clue how to use it. they don't need it anyway. they buy services from tech people. the government prints money. they don't need to know anything about anything. and that's good, because they don't!
 

The_Doc_Man

Immoderate Moderator
Staff member
Local time
Today, 03:11
Joined
Feb 28, 2001
Messages
27,001
I answered your HOW question. Don't ask me WHY somebody I don't even know did or didn't do something. My crystal ball is out being polished.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top Bottom