Met Chief says that banks shouldn't necessarily refund due to fraud

miller

takman wrote: »

But that's his fault

I don't disagree, it's the ambiguous definition of "fault" which is the main issue here.

pmduk

I think it's a shameful position for a senior police officer to take. Whilst I accept some people take insufficient care over banking transactions who is going to be judge and jury over these matters? But the arrogance of a police officer advocating less help for a victim of crime only confirms my long held belief he is in the wrong career.

rosehip

I switched to online banking as I was a victim of postal fraud but if the banks do bring in Hogan Howe's suggestion I'm out of online banking.

Superscrooge

Maybe I'm in the minority but I think the Met Chief makes a good point.

In the same way that it would be foolish to go on holiday and leave you front door open. Or leave your car unlocked with the keys in the ignition. It is also foolish to use the password '123456' or not use anti-virus software on your computer.

All he is saying is that customers should not automatically be compensated if they have failed to use anti-virus software or used obvious passwords

miller

Superscrooge wrote: »

Maybe I'm in the minority but I think the Met Chief makes a good point.

In the same way that it would be foolish to go on holiday and leave you front door open. Or leave your car unlocked with the keys in the ignition. It is also foolish to use the password '123456' or not use anti-virus software on your computer.

All he is saying is that customers should not automatically be compensated if they have failed to use anti-virus software or used obvious passwords

He fails to comprehend; it doesn't matter what password you use if a keylogger is installed.

Edit: I'll add to this, "Anti-Virus" is next to uselss; you need a powerful, secure browser.

pmduk

Superscrooge wrote: »

Maybe I'm in the minority but I think the Met Chief makes a good point.

In the same way that it would be foolish to go on holiday and leave you front door open. Or leave your car unlocked with the keys in the ignition. It is also foolish to use the password '123456' or not use anti-virus software on your computer.

Who is there to judge whether your password or anti-virus is sufficiently strong?

Ballard

miller wrote: »

He fails to comprehend; it doesn't matter what password you use if a keylogger is installed.

Edit: I'll add to this, "Anti-Virus" is next to uselss; you need a powerful, secure browser.

Indeed but how does the keylogger get installed in the first place? The bank won't have installed it.

henm2

Ballard wrote: »

Indeed but how does the keylogger get installed in the first place? The bank won't have installed it.

Yet another reason for using a safer operating system such as Linux Mint, Ubuntu, Zorin or LXLE. Then you won't be at risk of keyloggers, trojans, viruses affecting you as they do not work on such systems.

njm123

Linux Mint isn't entirely safe - their website was hacked recently and the distribution replaced with one with malicious code.

The problem I have with this suggestion is who determines what's reasonable.

- The police who's favorite phrases round here when investigating any crime seems to be "Investigation complete - no suspect identified."
- The bank who just want's to maximize profit

Anyone is vulnerable to internet crime, regardless of precautions that they take - there are too many attacks that rely on poor security on websites or un-patched vulnerabilities. I suspect this suggestion would lead to a blame the victim culture.


Examples of recent attacks include

- A legitimate Ad-network letting it;'s domain name lapse and being taken over by a malware network owner. Sites affected include the BBC and NY Times.
- There are attacks emerging that bypass ad-blockers and other security measures, made possible because the ad-networks spend a lot of money working out how to block the blockers.

Anyone falling victim to these types of attacks has probably done everything reasonable but I doubt vested interests will see it that way..

Only way to be safe if stay offline and go back to using shops, cash and cheques. Might create a few jobs, hit the banks profits and generate some tax revenue to fund the police to do their job.

LadyDee

I was most impressed today with my bank the Halifax.
I made a very small transfer of funds to a friend's account (just a few pounds), and I was unable to complete the transfer until I received a code on my mobile which I had to key in, thus allowing the transfer to go through.
I have no idea if this is common practise, but if anybody got into my online banking and tried to transfer any money out they wouldn't be able to do it unless they also had my mobile phone.
I'm sure there's going to be "OK, but what if ....", but I thought it was a good security measure.