The report was handed to ZDNet Australia during the course of its own research into a Victorian business called Ultimate Safe, which has been sending unsolicited bulk e-mail that advertises allegedly safe products.
The message makes several claims about the product which are misleading and deceptive, according to the submission, which was drafted by James White [not his real name*], a systems administrator from Melbourne.
The claims that are central to the complaint insist the products have been granted the endorsement of the Australian Federal Police (AFP), the Australian Taxation Office (ATO), and Mercedes Benz. White's submission claims these assertions were flatly rejected by all three organisations when he contacted them.
He told ZDNet Australia he had to do something about the message because he's just "sick of all this spam - it's that simple". He spent several hours of his own time making enquiries with the AFP, ATO and other organisations to ensure his report got the attention it deserved.
"There were two reasons. If you're going to lodge a complaint you need to do your research, or they'll bin it. Secondly, this was an Australian based business and you can actually get to them," he explained.
The level of research in the complaint is impressive. When responding to the safe maker's claim their product is "Legislated by the Australian Federal Police as 'One of Three ways to legally carry a handgun with-in the Australian Capital Territory,'" White did his homework.
He cited section 54 of the Firearms Act of 1996 which "clearly states that a welded metal box is to be used for the purpose specified". He then pointed out the product for sale is made of a polycarbonate material that is not approved by the AFP. He also made the perfectly valid point that it isn't the AFP's job to draft legislation.
Other concerns expressed in the submission include the listing of a Business Reference Number (BRN) that is not recorded in the Australian Securities and Investments Commission's names index. There is a listing for a Victorian business named Ultimate Safe but the business number is different from the one provided in the e-mail.
The phone and fax numbers provided in the e-mail have been associated with other unsolicited e-mails before, including the promotion of seminars on fundraising for non government organisations and charities. The fax number is an mbox -virtual" fax, and the phone number is answered by a machine that tells callers they've reached the "raptor" information line.
There are serious concerns over the business's data security methodologies too. Filling out and submitting an order for the product using the electronic form embedded in the e-mail will result in the customer's credit card number and order details being sent to the business via e-mail, completely free of any encryption.
Because this communication is actually initiated by the customer, the insecure technique may not even be illegal, according to Jerrard and Stuk's IT lawyer Erhan Karabardak.
-There's some doubt as to whether the privacy act would cover the information at that point because the business is not in possession or control of it until it is received," he said. -There's nothing to stop you sending [credit card] information to them by e-mail... they'll probably fall under the small business exemption in the Privacy Act anyway".
Recipients of e-mails such as this one should do exactly what White has, Karabardak said.
"If you have any doubts, get in touch with the department of fair trading and business affairs in your state".
Ultimate Safe may well find themselves on the wrong side of the Fair Trading Act in Victoria, says Karabardak.
"If a business represents that it has sponsorship, approval, or affiliation of, for example a government department or person, and that is shown not to be the case... An individual or body corporate may be subject severe fines as a result," he said.
*A substitute name was used in this article to protect the source from retribution from spam groups.
