Interesting. Jennysmith806 (if that's your real name!) just posted a comment on my post "e-Strategy online marketing site goes live!". 'Her' comment was entirely plagiarized from from an Australian government site called e-strategyguide (a guide to promoting websites).
Jennysmith806 wrote:
Keywords need to relate to your website. Avoid being too general or your listing will get lost in among thousands of other sites. For example, don’t use ‘football’ but rather something like ‘kids football club’; don’t use ‘child care’, use ‘ Richmond childcare’.
It seemed to be clearly a spam comment that got inserted based on the phrase "e-Strategy" in my post. There is no Jennysmith806 blog on Vox and Jennysmith806 does not show up in a Google search.
Yet there was also no link in the comment and no promotional message. I have no idea what's going on with this. It seems to be targeted comment spam with no rational behind it. 'Guess I'm going to have to do some further investigation...
I ran into an interesting, and troubling, situation today where some folks I know received an email informing them that their domain was being used in a DDoS attack on a website in Australia.
The really weird things was that the website listed in the complaint email was one they had never heard of.
At first glance, it appeared to be some kind of phishing email. But, upon digging further it turned out that the domain the complaint named was indeed listed under the address and phone number of my associates for technical, organization, and billing contacts. Only the email address was different (clearly a one-off yahoo mail address).
Someone had lifted the contact information of my associates from, either one of their legitimate domain registrations, or from their corporate site and used it to register a domain at Yahoo! Domains. The domain was then used in a DDoS attack and the blame (at least initially) fell on my associates.
There is no reason that whoever was behind this could not have inserted my associates corporate email too, leaving no trail at all (especially if they uses a stolen credit card number for the transaction, as I suspect they did).
With enough domains falsely registered under a single company's contact info, not only could a DDoS service be launched, but the spoofed company could end up spending a tremendous amount of time clearing their name and getting rid of the spoofed domain registrations. A double DDoS. One virtual. One real.
I have to admit, I'm actually surprised I haven't heard about this being a widespread problem...it certainly seems like it could easily and quickly become one.
I must give a plug for Yahoo here ...once contacted they quickly shut down and canceled the domain and promised to investigate further.
For the past two days ads have been popping up all of the interwebs, on TV and (reportedly) in print for some new series called Scarlet. Check out the website and trailer. The Web site is very high quality, the ads are on expensive sites (Yahoo, Gizmodo, others), the video is of good production quality and shows up in the usual places, and they list decent actors (Natassia Malthe) and a good director (David Nutter).
Yet the voiceover and actual shots are super cheesey and over the top, it lacks most of the critical details (no network listed), and the trailer scenes seem to make no sense at all (not in a mysterious way - just in a thrown togather randomly way).
It is so obviously a fake or spoof that I have to assume it's a viral ad for something. What amazes me is that no one has leaked what it's for. Despite it's cheese factor, I think it;s going to work. I can't wait to find out who's behind it and whether a (seemingly) large amount of cash and a good lid on leaks can generate guaranteed buzz. I think it can...
I have run into more than a few legal puzzels in my time that would be completely straightforward...until "the Internet" is dropped into the mix.
One that crossed my mind recently is the legality of recording phone calls when using GrandCentral.
Normally, as long as one party to the calls knows about the recording it is legal (so if one of the parties initiates the recording, notification is defacto). This is the federal statutory requirment, and the requirment of most states.
However, some states require both parties to be notified (which is why you get the message about recording for "quality assurance" purposes during many business calls). California is one of these states.
Now, lets say I use an internet based phone system like GrandCentral (a Google beta service) and my GrandCentral Number is a California area code. Anyone who is calling me would assume they are calling California and that California rules would apply. But, GrandCentral has a recording function that works just fine without notification, even calling a California number. And, in fact, the call may never be completed anywhere near California. It gets handled by GrandCentral and may ring my mobile (or landline) phone anywhere in the world. Maybe I take the call in Alaska (no two party notification requirement). Am I breaking California law if I record it? What if I take the call in Singapore where I could go to jail for recording...? But, of course, the actual recording is taking place at a Google facility - who knows where? Maybe the facility is in California (breaking the law?). Maybe it's in New York (no two party requirment - so is it legal?). Who the heck knows? Nobody...that's who.
We can toss this on the heap of stuff that will not be decided without a test case in every state and every Federal district.
It also would make a good addition to the Internet law book I'll never write.
I used to use a great plugin for Outlook called "Lookout" that handled the indexing of my email and files (local and network).
It did super fast searches, used very little resources, and was free. It was a Microsoft beta program and was only around for a few years. They got rid of it when they incorporated search into Vista.
The problem with Vista's search (as well as Google desktop search) is that when the file set get large (3+GB email and 100GB's of files) it uses up a ton of resources and slows things down to an unacceptable degree. Neither MS or Google desktop search is all that standout on indexing network files either.
Man, how I miss Lookout!
That why I was so excited to read in TechCrunch about a new indexer (and much more) called Xobni ("inbox" backwards - oh how these email search apps like the backwords spelling!), now in beta and about to be aquired by Microsoft. It looks like a lightning fast indexer, with catogorization, meta data, threaded discussions, and web-lookup thrown in.
Oh, how I want this!!!
I'm hoping to start the beta soon!
Our agency has a great new communications channel devoted to our e-Strategy online practice. David Erickson, our very own in-house SEO maestro, online communications guru and fellow e-Strategy Director, put it to gather to illuminate new thinking in online communication and marketing, and to showcase the stellar talent and services we bring to bear on behalf of our clients every day.
Check it out today - and keep checking it out day after day! (Heck, add it as a feed now!)
Plus - it's getting me back into my blogging groove. Go blogging groove!!! Go!!!
