[NTLK] Hi

[James Fraser]

Hello,

--- On Thu, 2/7/13, Forrest <newtonphoenix at mindspring.com> wrote:

> Good discussion. However, let me point out that those of us
> who are knowledgeable have taken the necessary precautions,
> even those with Yahoo! accounts. 

Speaking as someone who is always looking to expand his stock of knowledge, what are the necessary precautions to which you refer?  Without knowing what they are, exactly, it's difficult to gauge whether one might be overlooking something.

(Of course, as eager as I am to learn new stuff, I also feel obligated to point out that Bad Guys can read this list via the list archives just as readily as the Good Guys can.  Caveat scriptor.)

> It looks like it's those that don't pay attention, or have
> dormant accounts, that are more likely to get hacked.

I agree that dormant accounts are probably more likely to get hacked than active ones, if only because an active account holder is more likely to report a breach of their account security in the hopes of regaining access to their mail (or so I would think, anyway).

That said, I find myself wondering if going after inactive accounts is an actual policy on the part of the Bad Guys, or if the proliferation of free email providers simply increases the odds of any random hacked account being an inactive one. 

(Are there, perhaps, testimonies from ex-spammers online that talk about that sort of thing?)


Best,

James Fraser