On 01/05/2013 20:08, David.WE.Roberts wrote:
> On Wed, 01 May 2013 08:35:06 -0700, Man at B&Q wrote:
>
>> On 1 May, 15:34, Martin Brown <|||
newspam...@nezumi.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>> On 01/05/2013 15:24, Man at B&Q wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 1 May, 14:01, "David.WE.Roberts" <
nos...@nospam.net> wrote:
>>>>> Has anyone had any dealings with GURUAID?
>>>
>>>>> A friend tried to ring Microsoft Support and ended up with this
>>>>> company.
>>>
>>>>> They tried to sell he support services, and she declined.
>>>
>>>>> However, believing that they were MS she allowed them to remotely
>>>>> connect to her PC.
>>>
>>>>> Google suggests lots of complaints about the charges and failure to
>>>>> fix problems but not so far about putting malware on the computer.
>>>
>>>>> So - do calls to Microsoft Support get routed to GURUAID?
>>>
>>>>> Or is this just a Google ranking thing where they get further up the
>>>>> list than
support.microsoft.com.
>>>
>>>> What relevance is a google ranking to whether a phone call is re-
>>>> routed?
>>>
>>>> Whose number did she actually dial?
>>>
>>>> MBQ
>>>
>>> Probably their number which by a very cunning piece of search engine
>>> summary analysis appears prominently at the top of the search result.
>>
>> Yes, in which case "tried to ring Microsoft Support and ended up with
>> this company" and "calls to Microsoft Support get routed to GURUAID"
>> should really be "rang some random number that appeared in a google
>> result" rather than going to the Microsoft website and looking for their
>> contact details.
>>
>> Some people just should not be let loose on the Internet.
>
> Sigh!
>
> Thank you for your insightful and caring response.
>
> I was trying to check if she did actually ring a Microsoft support number
> and get re-routed, or if she rang a number she thought was a Microsoft
> number but which in fact wasn't.
Can't you look at her browser log and phone records?
> The first option seemed possible since I Googled Microsoft support and
> came straight up with
support.microsoft.com in the first 4 or 5 hits.
>
> However it turns out that the offending Google results were adverts, so it
> is likely that my browser blocked them whereas hers did not.
If you block adverts then the real MS support site should be #1 hit.
(for any sensible set of search terms)
However the first four or so hits with adverts permitted are all
parasitic rip-you-off big time sites and other scammers. Increasingly
the top half page of any web search with adverts allowed I would not
touch with a barge pole. It is probably high time that a UK consumer
program hauled Google and Bling over the coals about this. YMMV
Same happened with sales of Olympics tickets and other long lead time
events. Joe Public cannot understand that the green lock *ONLY* means
that the data you transfer is safe from eavesdroppers and does not mean
that the destination is legitimate. All it really means is that they
have paid their dues to Verisign or similar and have a valid security
certificate that checks out (costs at most a few thousand dollars).
I have known legitimate sites cock it up and have invalid ones too :(
> Judging by searches, a lot of people have fallen for this one.
>
> Anyway, it looks as though they are commercial vultures not malware
> scammers.
I suppose it depends on your definition of scammers. They have paid
Google/Bling handsomely to usurp and pass off their site as being
Microsoft UK support in the number one position at top of page.
The page is also very cunningly designed to summarise in a way that
makes it look like it is giving you the UK Microsoft freephone no.
Considering how litigious MS have been in the past about M&S selling
"Microsoft" ladies tights one can only assume that as they do not
complain vociferously about this clear case of passing off a site as
"Microsoft Support UK" that they are taking a share of the profits.
Cross post added to uk.legal for additional input.
Try a search for UK Microsoft Support (adverts enabled)
But don't visit the site unless you have a very robust sandbox.
--
Regards,
Martin Brown