Hahaha stupid lady that wanted to buy all iphones

Lady wanted to flip the iphones on ebay but plan got backfired

http://anonym.to/?http://www.myfoxdfw.com/myfox/pages...Id=1.1.1&sflg=1

This is one of those sites that loads scripts from a bunch of different places when you visit it. I finally gave temporary permission for the myfoxdfw script, and then I received a new security warning that says

Allow www.myfoxdfw.com to access your camera and microphone?

Click to expand...

Why?

We've relaxed standards recently. At one time we consistently asked that a link point to a site, and then the member can decide whether they want to run the executable or not. With the popularity of Youtube and such, executables became common practice. However, following linked executables never became a safer practice. If anything, the situation is more hazardous than ever.

Not to single you out, Greenstuffs, but eventually something will need to be done. Posting nothing more than a link and no comment constitutes little more than what can be performed on a sharable bookmark site. That the linked executable is an executing script that wants access to your camera and microphone is even more reason for being concerned.

Hahaha, owned. I actually read that Apple's imposed rule is only 2 per customer... Serves her right for trying to scalp other customers.

carrot said:

Hahaha, owned. I actually read that Apple's imposed rule is only 2 per customer... Serves her right for trying to scalp other customers.

Click to expand...

So the young man basically spent hours in line and got his iphone for free.... and still has money left in his pockets. Ha ha. :lolsign:

Empath, that's an interesting point. I think people are now more relaxed about clicking on executable links, especially if it's a site they have used before, like YouTube, which you give as a good example. Rather than go first to the site's main page, then hunt down the page you want, then execute, it just saves so much time to have a one-click shortcut...

One of the problems is that these things are almost impossible to spot. Is there any easy way to filter them?

I use Firefox with the NoScript add-on. It stops scripts until you approve them on sites you haven't whitelisted.

Another question ... what software gave you the warning about the camera and microphone usage of the script after clearance in No-Script?

I did not get such a warning.
This might have something to do with the fact that I do not have
a Mic or Camera connected right now, but still ...

bernie

I assume it was NoScript. It appeared when I clicked on the video after permitting the "myfox" script to run.

That could be a wrong assumption too. I've other security software running that might have intercepted it.

Edit: I'll run the site under Sandboxie, and see if I can get a duplication.

Okay, I gave it full permission for everything under SandBoxie, but it wouldn't run anything. I then tried under IE, and it won't even load the start of the video. Whether it's due to Sandboxie, my firewall, NOD32 or what, I don't know.

I'm beginning to wonder if the whole thing was a PR stunt of some sort.

1) Is anyone really crazy enough to carry $100,000 in cash and flash it around like that?

2) Did you notice that the kid had an unusually good on-camera presence?

3) Did you also notice that they both seemed to be well-miked?

:thinking:

I saw the video when it appeared on digg.com and had no problems/warnings. Im using Opera.


Pablo

Owned.

That's the only word that comes to my mind.

Empath said:

I use Firefox with the NoScript add-on. It stops scripts until you approve them on sites you haven't whitelisted.

Click to expand...

I'm running Firefox ver 2.0.0.4 and that does not say it works with versions higher than 1.1.5.03, have you verifed that is works?

I found it's available at YouTube, and you can bypass myfoxfw's 6 scripts from all over. It's still an executable, but it didn't ding me with a bunch of scripts, other than Google and the infernal Doubleclick.

Lux, it works. I'm using version 1.1.5 and Firefox 2.0.0.4

flipping iphones on ebay is a bad investement anyways. apple made ALOT of them, they are not in short supply. law of supply and demand still applies

I give the lady credit for having the guts to go through with her plan as well as showing some entrepreneurial spirit however she should have done a bit more research like maybe phoning the store ahead of time. I have seen many different stores impose similar limits on newly released items.

It could be that I'm just giving myself too much credit, but I seriously think I would have actually wondered- if not assumed it -if there would be a limit on the number of iPhones I could actually buy. The thread title fits perfectly! What would have made a better newscast, though, would have been for them to actually show the lady's face when they told her there'd be a limit, and to show her reactions afterward. I still want to see the part where she's pissed off and asking the kid for her money back or something like that!

LOL (period)

Not to be terribly cruel, but I hope she's prepared for her 15 minutes of fame, because that video has Digg written all over it.

That looked staged to me...Who goes around flashing 100K anyways? Good call on the mike'd observation. It was probably a PR stunt.

BugOutGear_USA said:

That looked staged to me...Who goes around flashing 100K anyways? Good call on the mike'd observation. It was probably a PR stunt.

Click to expand...

I agree it looked staged. Maybe that was just the editing. There would have been more complaining by the woman, and also the people in line behind her. You can't just pay to enter in front, the guy would have had to sacrifice his place. Maybe he just let her buy one of his 2 phones allotted.