Why do Nigerian email scammers say they're from Nigeria?

iStockphoto

(CBS News) "Dear Sir/Madam" the emails usually begin. And then come the promises of quick money, the assurances that a royal family member will make good on the bargain (accompanied by numerous typos.) By now, everyone is familiar with "Nigerian scammers" - that brand of spam that seeks a cash investment and the promise of a big payday. But surely actual scammers would have realized by now that no one believes a Nigerian prince will offer up thousands of dollars to random strangers. According to new research, not only do scammers not worry about people being skeptical - they actively encourage it.

Microsoft researcher Cormac Herley looked into the matter and concluded, "Far-fetched tales of West African riches strike most as comical. Our analysis suggests that is an advantage to the attacker, not a disadvantage."

"By sending an email that repels all but the most gullible the scammer gets the most promising marks to self-select." Herley wrote.

This is why so many email scams claim to originate from Nigeria - though most spam emails come from elsewhere, including the United States. Anyone with any degree of familiarity with Internet scams will immediately close the email, leaving only the most susceptible victims to actually read its contents.

As Herley points out, "The scam involves an initial email campaign which has almost zero cost per recipient. Only when potential victims respond does the labor-intensive and costly offort of following up by email (and sometimes phone) begin."

It seems counterintuitive, but by being so obvious with their deception, scammers actually maximize their chance of making money. Since only the most gullible victims will respond, the chance that they will actually fork over money to the attacker increases.

Reed Cormac Herley's complete study HERE for more information (and the math to back it up.)

[bobnjersey]

[It seems counterintuitive, but by being so obvious with their deception, scammers actually maximize their chance of making money. Since only the most gullible victims will respond, the chance that they will actually fork over money to the attacker increases.]
-----------------------------------------------
so then ... the best 'counter scam' would be for many people to respond but provide erroneous information that would waste the time and effort of the scammer ... thereby reducing the effectiveness of the scam ... no?

[granniesrock]

I love getting this scam e-mails because I write back to jerk their chains. The next to the last one I got, I think the person was hooked thinking I was stupid. After several e-mails he told me that if I would send $700.00 for certain expenses, then he would do the paperwork in order for me to claim the 31 million that was being held for me. I counter offered and told him he had my permission to deduct the $700.00 and any other expenses he may incur, plus,as I was not greedy, he could even keep half of the 31 million for himself and then send the remaining portion to me. Haven't heard a thing since. Sometimes I tell them that I am not worthy to receive such a large sum of money and give them names of charities along with my permission to disburse the money along those lines. But usually I tell them to take any expenses and their fees off the top and send the rest to me. Haven't gotten a dime yet. LOL

[Fed-Up_Patriot]

So how do this differ from regular commercial spam, junk mail, and telemarketers? Same premise. Practically 0 cost for the attacker. And as the article pointed out only the most gullible victims will respond. In the meantime we all suffer and our email boxes and regular mail boxes continue to overflow.

There never will be peace on this issue in the US so long as congress continues to work for corporate America lobbyist first and regular taxpaying citizens last. Congress after all made it a requirement for everybody in the US to contact all 260,000 businesses learn their privacy policy and then opt-out using each companies specific procedures. In the meantime most countries in the rest of the civilized world work on the premise of opt-in.

[askagain]

Direct mail is direct mail. However, many companies solicit for legitamate products and services unlike the Nigerian spammers. Things are unlikely to change because direct mail is worth billions of dollars in sales for both small and large businesses. The huge amount of direct mail also generates a lot of money for the post office. If you really hate receiving direct mail, you can send back empty postage paid envelopes when included by the sender. Just be advised that doing this just make products and services more expensive for everyone. Of course, some people don't care about that.

[askagain]

Years ago, as an insurance agent, I would send homeowners a thousand letters per week. The rule of thumb with direct mail is that 1 to 3 per cent of those receiving a direct mail letter respond. In my case, people who had a need for insurance responded. Even if the same direct mail letter was sent to the same neighborhoods four weeks in a row, it was a pretty safe bet that 1 to 3 per cent of the reciprients would respond. The self selecting concept really applies. Agents want to find those who need their products at any given moment. Incidentally, the same holds true for cold calls. If you call 100 people, you can expect to make 1 to 3 appointments. Generally, the agents who are willing to hear a lot of rejection who are the most successful. That is one reason many people don't succeed as agents. The real reward is for the rejections you receive.

[Scimajor]

1 to 3 percent sounds exceptionally high. I would have expected 1/10th of 1 percent to be closer to the mark. I find it highly surprising that up to 3 out of 1 hundred people would respond to any one particular bit of spam.