phony FBI virus
Click to enlarge

A 21-year-old man turned himself in to police and confessed to downloading child porn after he received an FBI warning message telling him he was the subject of an investigation that actually turned out to be a scam.

Jay Matthew Riley walked into Garfield District Station in Woodbridge, William County, with his computer and asked if there were any warrants on file for him.

He explained that a message popped up on his screen while he was watching child porn, ordering him to pay a fine or else he would be the subject of a criminal investigation.

But the message was actually a computer virus which has been infecting computers since early last year that the FBI actually warned about on their website.

When police searched Riley’s computer, they found inappropriate messages and photos of underage girls. One was a 13-year-old from Minnesota…

The virus is known as Reveton ransomware, which is designed to extort money from its victims after they click on a compromised website

The message says the user’s Internet address was identified by the FBI as having been associated with child pornography sites or other illegal online activity…

To unlock their machines, users are required to pay a fine using a prepaid money card service. Otherwise they will be subject to investigation.

Har!

Thanks, Honeyman



  1. Enemy_of_the_State says:

    ransomware pays off for once

  2. Sucker Punch says:

    Are you sure Jay Matthew Riley isn’t a Congressman or a Congressman’s aid or something?

    Don’t get me started on child porn. I see no humor in that shit anywhere! It’s like no one even cares to find the sick sons of bitches taking these pictures. But if you happen to run across one of these (sick) pictures or somehow allow some other bastard to plant a few on your computer, you better get ready for a very serious legal game of hide and seek or “tag – you’re it” or something.

    I’m not trying to stick up for this poor dumb perverted bastard. But maybe someone else might want to thank you for the heads up by telling us his story.

    • Glenn E. says:

      Very likely the picture takers are protected by their Country’s far looser moral code of laws. And they’re making their money, providing photos to those in the Countries with tighter moral laws. And just as many US cities’ officials go after the “Johns” of prostitution, to prove they’re tough on sex crimes. They can only go after the “downloaders” of child porn, not the out of state (or nation) uploaders of child porn. And I doubt they care to, if they could. No political advantage to their careers. It wouldn’t be like they were going after Bin Laden. Just some sleazebags in Russia or someplace. Not worth the red tape to even find them.

  3. Glenn E. says:

    So the law probably can’t (or won’t) be bothered to go after the cyber extortionist or fraudster. But some guy who looks at dirty pictures of young girls (who probably posed for daddy, in some foreign country where it’s accepted), gets locked up for a while. And most everyone is kind of happy about that, I suspect. While we’re at it, let’s lock up all the problem drinkers, before they can kill with their cars. Why is that considered too extreme, a policy? But people addicted to pornography (which is just pictures and words, that very very likely isn’t going to kill anyone) get the jail time, as their “therapy”. I’d say because the Alcohol industry is behind keeping its abusers and addicts, out of jail, to protect its bottom line. But politicians can exploit their supposed hard line jail policy on “sexual deviants”, as a vote getter. Of course if the politicians jailed everyone who drank too much. They wouldn’t be reelected very long. Even if it did make the streets safer for all the sober citizens.

    But OMG, some people are out there, that get a little bored seeing the same silicon and surgically altered sluts, take their clothes off for whatever adult magazines or websites that will pay their “modeling” price. So they desire to see some younger, unsoiled, beauties. And unfortunately, only the underaged fall into that catagory, anymore. But if you think about. You can find similar “art” of underaged girls, in most museums. Done by some pretty famous painters, of the day. Apparently, this was back when painting naked unspoiled young girls, and was acceptable. And nobody is accusing today’s museums of promoting child pornography, by continuing to exhibit these works. So you see, it’s largely a matter of political exploitation, of a non-issue. If the anti-child porn advocates were to storm the art museums, with demands. The media would be all over this, defending freedom of expression and the works of old masters. And the concerns of the protesters would be put down as a bunch of puritans, or something.

    So it’s a matter of who’s bottom line is at stake, and how much money that represents. Museums, the film industry, they’ve got major bottom lines. Private individual perverts, not politically connected, have got very tiny bottom lines. So it’s Ok to prosecute them, for a sex addiction. Millions of dollars aren’t at stake, if they go to jail. But instead, millions of dollars might be at stake if they don’t go to jail. Or just some politicos’ careers.

    • flatwombat says:

      The “point” is that kids are being abused to satisfy some sick asshat’s need for porn. Kids that can’t defend themselves and will possibly be scarred for life from the abuse. This line: “So they desire to see some younger, unsoiled, beauties.” makes me very uneasy about your interest in defending the pervs.

      • Glenn E. says:

        Well someone has to defend them from the “witch hunters”, who don’t really care about the perversion, half as much as they do about getting their pound of flesh. What happened to rehabilitating these people? All some people care about is exploiting these “prevs” for fun and profit. Such as NBC Tv’s little crusade.

        Where are all those who are so shocked about child porn, when children worldwide are getting killed by landmines and gunfire? War is Ok, just don’t sell naughty pictures of these kids? I think the exclusive focus on a safe morality issue, is being conveniently small minded. Want to stop some really serious perversion? Protest war 1st.

        • flatwombat says:

          Rehab the pervs? About as effective as trying to turn gays straight. It’s what turns them on, for whatever switching is messed up in their brains. Does viewing it lead to acting on it? Certainly doesn’t diminish the desires.

          And your point about all the kids killed in wars: War=bad, Kid Porn=bad. Problem with war is we can’t get rid of the instigators of war without billions being spent for no real solutions. At least with kid porn, we can stop some individuals who either produce or consume such crap. It’s not perfect, but it has a better chance of success considering all of human history’s effectiveness on stopping War.

          • Glenn E. says:

            That sounds too much like the same delusion that lead to Prohibition of Alcohol, in the 1920s. As if the US stood a chance of eliminating all drunkenness, by jailing anyone who drank or sold booze. How did that one work out, for ya? A huge bust, as I recall. And millions of tax dollars wasted, as well as spawning organized crime (that got started by supplying illegal booze).

            The biggest problem I have with your “lock them all up, don’t cure them” vengeful solution. Is that it’s never applied equally or fairly to all. I don’t see every Catholic Priest going to jail, for fondling young boys. Nor most of your rich and famous pervs, or the politically connected ones. Let’s see, how much jail time did Michael Jackson serve for sleeping with childrens? Or was that even considered a crime, because their parents drove them to his place? Now, the media seem willing to forgive and forget it ever happened. And that’s not just looking at pictures of naked children, mind you. That’s first hand physical contact, the famous and clerical are getting away with. But the law (and you) seem to be only willing to punish the picture pervs, of middle or low income. And by punish, I mean ruin their lives forever, with offender registries, than never apply to other severe crimes, like drunk driving or manslaughter. So basically their punishment is never over. Because unlike any other sickness or ignorance that leads to a crime, it’s assume they can never get better. And you possess all the psychiatric degrees to know this for sure, I suppose.

    • Tim says:

      For real. What about all those naked fat kids with wings grandma has all over the bathroom wall?

  4. Glenn E. says:

    The thought just occurs to me that if this “lock up” or “blocking” ware was really something that’s up the rise. Then Microsoft, and/or Apple, should provide something that unlocks or unblocks the PCs, of the victimized users. There ought to be something, people can do, besides paying extortionists. Or reformatting their systems. And if it requires human remote assistance. Then it should be confidential. Because some guy in India can’t know if anyone, anywhere, is really guilty of anything some wares says. So people shouldn’t feel they can’t get assistance, because of some phony accusations. And you can bet that there will be phony ones, when the extortionists don’t make enough money off the so-called “really” guilty. If they haven’t done so, already.

    So where’s the “Malicious Software Removal Tool” equivalent of dealing with these blocking wares and viruses? Or is Microsoft protecting them, because the govt. might have similar ideas?

    • Benjamin says:

      Actually, starting the computer in safe mode and then running system restore gets rid of the virus, at least the version, I had. (And no, I was not looking at porn.)

  5. bobbo, the iconoclastic non-conflating non-dogmatic existential Idol defiling cynosure says:

    A year or so ago I got the same kind of notice for downloading copyrighted material. “You never know” but I think my computer still worked, so I deleted it as “fishing” and haven’t gotten any second kind of notice===lots of letters from Nigeria though.

    Kinda interesting if it was some kind of virus as well that shut the computer down?===but then you wouldn’t ((most likely)) be able to send a Pay Pal payment to the Hijacker?

    Poor sap. I see NOTHING WRONG with Child Porn….. other than any encouragement to take the original pictures…. and even then, it depends. I have to agree with Bret Michaels, the Rock and Role star. I was channel surfing years ago and he was talking about what kind of porn he liked. He said: “Women doing House Work (specifically vacuuming I think he said).” Its weird, but I agree. Elizabeth Hurley with a Hoover! That and a beer….. and I’m set.

    It is amazing how stupid many criminals are…… and how moronically moralistic the rest of us are??????

  6. Mr Diesel says:

    Bobbo,

    That is very telling. You have no problem with pictures anal raping a little child or raping a baby? Nice. Don’t bother posting to anything I ever comment on because I won’t give a shit.

    I have only helped once jailing someone and that was for child porn.

    • bobbo, the iconoclastic non-conflating non-dogmatic existential Idol defiling cynosure says:

      Mr D—how come those on the moral trip wire of outrage never seem to read even so little as a complete sentence? What do you think this continuing modification means: “other than any encouragement to take the original pictures…. and even then, it depends.”

      Haven’t we all read that parents get arrested on pornography charges for taking/having/distributing pictures of their own 2-3-4 yo kiddies taking a bath in the kitchen sink?

      More problematic–telephoto shot from 100 yards away of soiled panties of kiddies on a jungle gym.

      Anal raping huh? Thats where your mind went? I was thinking adults vacuuming the floor with a baby en papoose….. just another difference between us.

      We can all agree on the “extreme child porn” as simply the filming of a crime on tape. That is and should be illegal. I just assumed, as we are all level headed reasonable adults on this forum that the discussion would focus on the closer cases.

      As usual…. I’m wrong.

      Let’s all hold hands and over react?

      • McCullough says:

        Bobbo, we’re all very sure it sounded much better in your head at the time.

        Shark jumping isn’t actually a sport.

        • bobbo, are we Men of Science, or Devo says:

          I do get caught up in myself from time to time. I’m just so happy I did add the modifier. Makes me feel all innocent and stuff.

          I won’t do it, but anyone want to bet I couldn’t find a picture claimed to be child porn that even, or maybe even especially Mr D, wouldn’t agree: “Thats not Child Porn!”

          Kiddies in the sink.

  7. Mr Diesel - Bobbo who thinks nothing is wrong with child porn says:

    Too little, too late. You can try and back pedal till hell freezes over and nothing will be more telling the you see nothing wrong with child porn.

    Bobbo:”I see NOTHING WRONG with Child Porn….. other than any encouragement to take the original pictures…. and even then, it depends.”

    You lost your argument when you typed it.

  8. Mark says:

    Bobbo. Really..?

    Regain control of your sophistry, sir!

    • bobbo, are we Men of Science, or Devo says:

      Thanks Mark. I shall so return, but how am I ever to flex my wings?

      Actually, the issue is “sensitive” enough even to my sophistry, that I don’t want to make the effort.

      The sophistry, argument, winning position is all there in the complete statement. Its those CAPS that capture your attention.

  9. bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas says:

    You know boys…THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH CHILD PORN. Thats why it can be produced by using realistic cartoons or with young looking actresses. It is as I said: THE MAKING OF THE PORN that is wrong and should be against the law.

    Too fine a point? Well–only if you are too lazy to understand the point.

    I don’t think that is even sophistry. Just an honest look at the component parts of a bigger issue. No doubt—thinking will make you unpopular.

    …….but I dither.

    • Glenn E. says:

      The problem with that is that there is a wide definition of what child porn is. Some would think it’s only kids being photographed having sex with adults or other kids. While others would believe it covers any suggestive action or pose, of children live, painted or drawn, in any condition of dress or undress. By that standard most teenage fashion magazines, and department store catalogs, would be guilty of child porn. But they have lots of lawyers. So they’re not too worried.

      The fanatics who want to jail all the viewers of anything the least bit pornographic of young children, must feel that this will dry up the market for those making the photographs, in their protected haven countries. But just like the War on Drugs, that’s not likely to succeed either. It will just make easy jobs for law enforcement to catch, prosecute, and jail all the picture holders. Cause they are rarely the violent or illusive types.

      Meanwhile we’re turning America into the world’s most Imprisoned Nation, once more. Like when alcohol was the evil that had to be stomped out. All they really needed to do then, was educate the public to drink responsibly. Not turn it into a morals crusade, via the legal system. And so a public education solution stands a better chance of working, than imprisoning all the potential pervs, for their dirty “thought crimes”.

      You can’t successfully legislate morally. It has never worked before. And it will never work now, or in the future. But all those who think the job of their govt is to take care of them in all ways. Believe that using govt to enforce morality, will somehow magically work. All it ever really does is give the politicians something easier to pretend to care about, and do it badly. Meanwhile the nations infrastructure is collapsing, rusting away, and becoming obsolete (compared to other nations). Because so much tax payer resources are reserved for the anti-pervert patrol. A collapsing bridge, in any one’s town, will likely take more lives of children than some porn perv will. But by all means, let’s legislate ourselves a moral Utopian society, while the buildings all crumple down on us. We can blame that on the terrorists. 🙂

  10. Glenn E. says:

    I occurs to me that this recent push to get the federal govt and local law enforcement into the morality game. Is really about making up for the decrease in serious crimes, that the FBI tells us are on the decline. What are all the lawyers and judges to do?! Well let’s invent new crimes for them to prosecute, and for us to have to pay to defend ourselves from being accused of. Yeah, that’s the ticket. Because we can’t just reduce the size of the legal system, in times of less serious crime. Probably the results by having improved records keeping of past offenders. But lawyers and judges aren’t going to stand for a cut in pay, or position. If anything, they want their sons and daughters to have such jobs, waiting for them. So to fuel the demand for more law enforcement and prosecution. They have to make up for the decline in old serious crimes, by inventing new ones. And believe it or not, during the Victoria era, having pictures of some nude children was NOT A CRIME. So it has become a newly invented crime of the late 20th century (and early 21st). And for no other really good reason, except to keep the tax dollars flowing into the court systems. If all child porn magically went away, they’d have to come up with some other thought crimes, you could be guilty of. Possibly the desire to eat too much. “You’re over weight, so obviously you’re guilty.” Or maybe not eating enough would be a future crime. “Why are you so thin, are you a sex perv is some way?” There will always be some excuse for govt to step in and enforce trumped up laws, to benefit the legal system’s financial future. Just as the medial profession manages to lower the accepted rates of blood pressure, cholesterol, etc. When they need to sell more drugs to fix those new rates.

  11. OvenMaster says:

    “…the law of loyalty to the people”?

    and

    “The Department for the Fight Against Cyberactivity”?

    I give zero fucks for anyone who’s truly stupid enough to not read what they agree to or sign and actually fall for scams like this.

  12. msbpodcast says:

    Boy, sound like he would have fallen for any Nigerian 419 scam, ‘cept he has no money in the first place.

    Bet he was guilty of having a stolen VHS copy of Pretty Baby and thought it was kiddy porn because of the cigarette smoking scene.

  13. bobbo, the pragmatic existential evangelical anti-theist says:

    ± says:
    7/29/2013 at 7:06 pm

    Still, I would’ve thought he would keep that admission to himself. /// Engage the brain and read the whole thing. Then the entirety of my other comments. I have been going back and forth on the issue myself. My nom de flames are in conflict with one another: always a good circumstance to calmly reflect on.

    1. Our only reason for being on Earth: raise the kiddies.
    2. FREEEEEEEEEEEEDOM
    3. What are the real world constraints on over applied existential philosophy
    4. What do words mean
    5. Why not graze with the sheep
    6. Is the harm so direct that speech should be restricted.

    If you think one and only one thing, you are brain dead.

    aka—-engage the subject. Grow a brain.

    Silly Hoomans.

  14. bobbo, we think with words, and flower with ideas says:

    Mr D/Pedo: Just what I was talking about:

    http://thesmokinggun.com/documents/teen-girl-arrested-for-child-porn-675432

    17 yo girl arrest and charged with child porn for taking a picture of herself.

    Which is more accurate: nothing wrong with child porn -or- throw her in jail and create a criminal record and sexual predator status???

    • Tim says:

      Trailor trash — note the efficient placement of fan in background. Her face is rather generic; I’m thinking 2015 is not that far forward in time nor 350 miles that distant in space. “….lean on me when you’re not strong…”


0

Bad Behavior has blocked 13751 access attempts in the last 7 days.