retroworks writes: Dinei Florencio and Cormac Herley write that cybercrime, like unrestricted fishing, depleted gullible and unprotected users, producing diminishing returns (over-phishing?). They argue that the statistics on the extent of losses from cybercrime are flawed because there is never an under-estimation (or gain) reported. Do they underestimate the number of suckers gaining internet access born every minute? Or has cybercrime become the "shark attack" that gets reported more often than it occurs? Link to Original Source
This is the theory that Jack built.
This is the flaw that lay in the theory that Jack built.
This is the palpable verbal haze that hid the flaw that lay in...