‘LoverSpy’ creator indicted
p2pnet.net News View:- “Spyware.LoverSpy monitors and records all the activity that occurs on your computer, such as email, Web sites visited, instant messaging communication, passwords, files, and keystrokes. Periodically, the spyware sends an email to a predefined email address containing the logged information.”
That’s what Symantec has to say about it, going on, “Spyware.LoverSpy may arrive as an email greeting card. When you receive the e-card, Spyware.LoverSpy will be automatically and silently installed into your system.”
It’s an $89 application “designed to allow jealous lovers to snoop on their sweethearts’ online activities,” says the Washington Post, but its creator, Carlos Enrique Perez-Melara, 25 creator, and several buyers have been indicted on “35 counts of manufacturing, sending and advertising a surreptitious interception device and unauthorized access to protected computers”.
If Perez-Melara is convicted, he could face up to 175 years in jail.
“Four people who bought the program, sold online for $89, were indicted on two counts each of illegal computer hacking,” says the Post, adding:
“Each count carries a maximum penalty of up to five years in prison and a maximum fine of $250,000. Authorities said others were charged in Texas, Hawaii, North Carolina and Missouri.”
Perez-Melara boasted, “Through our service, you compose and send your lover a normal-looking ‘Greeting Card’ saying ‘I Love you’ or a similar message,” said 90% Crud. “Because the e-mail appears to be a regular greeting card, the recipient will open the e-card and LoverSpy will be automatically and silently installed!
“The program begins monitoring them IMMEDIATELY, there is no delay. It records and sends you all e-mails they view, including Hotmail, Yahoo, and Outlook emails.”
If there’s something you think we should know, contact us – tips[at]p2pnet.net
See:-
Washington Post – Jealous Lover Program Creator Is Indicted, August 27, 2005
August 28th, 2005 at 1:06 am
It’s about time that serious legal action is being taken against those who produce, market, and sell this snoopware. It’s perhaps the most insideous form of spyware that exists. It’s tantamount to concurrently having your phone tapped, your mail opened, someone sneaking around behind you writing down every book you even look at in the library, every item that you look at in a store, every paint chip or wall paper sample you peruse in Home Depot, etc.
It’s one thing if you install it on your OWN computer, (pehaps because others, like one’s children, use the computer YOU OWN) but another matter entirely to secretly have it installed on another person’s computer.
The use of this in the workplace though is somewhat in a gray area. A reasonable accommodation is to allow it to be installed, but it cannot ‘hide’. The company should make it known that it’s installed (both in policies and with a banner when the system boots) and it’s being monitored. Perhaps an exception could be made for installing single instances where there is probable cause to believe that some kind of misbehavior against published policies or illegal activity is taking place.
August 28th, 2005 at 2:36 am
But really, what’s the difference between installing this on your lovers pc and hiring a private investigator to spy on them instead? Other than the spyware being cheaper?
Why is one ok, but not the other?
April 19th, 2006 at 11:01 am
Can writing software be a crime?
Then companys that sell tape recorders should be punishable.
Can manufacturing weapons be a crime? After all more people die veryday from wepons then spy softwares.
April 19th, 2006 at 11:02 am
Can writing software be a crime?
Then companys that sell tape recorders should be punishable.
Can manufacturing weapons be a crime? After all more people die veryday from wepons then spy softwares.
April 29th, 2008 at 8:59 am
This form of stalking is egregious and needs to end. There needs to be laws in place that can seriously prosecute any criminals whom sadistically “spy” on others to obtain personal and financial information. When someone illegally watches and tapes someone without their consent, that is voyeurism and very perverse. Anyone whom defends this kind of ILLEGAL activity is sadistic, soulless, and without any empathy for others whatsoever.
The patriot act clearly defines that it is illegal to intercept electronic communications or tap phones for purposes of tortuous and abusive activities. If the us government and military must adhere to these LAWS then why can’t john q public do the same.