An interesting piece in today's Guardian. It looks as though the banks can now refuse to compensate for fraud if you do not have up to date AV software...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2008/jun/12/hitechcrime.law
I half agree, if people are going to disclose passwords on the PC and access their bank details, they should have these things, it is the publics responsibility to ensure that they do.
But, on the other hand, are banks just after making more money?
:fence: :fence: :fence:
They will shoot themselves in the foot if they impose this, they save billions of £'s by us using online banking.
I'm still fighting Barclaycard over the recent fraudulent use of my card number (which looks increasingly as if it was stolen from the Cotton Traders site).
They have rejected, but not told me till I phoned, part of my claim on the grounds that I use one of the retailers involved. This is a worrying development - it means that I am at risk for any transactions made at a previously used retailer. (Barclaycard are having another think about it!!)
At this rate, my online shopping habits are going to change dramatically.
But Rik, you have up to date AV, so it won't affect you?
QuoteAt this rate, my online shopping habits are going to change dramatically.
it's probably best to just transfer some money into a debit account setup for the purpose, just before you make a purchase so there's sod all in there for them to take, personal opinion anyway.
That is outrageous Rik, you have done nothing wrong, yet Barclay's are behaving in this manner.. :mad:
Please keep us updated, my Morgan Stanley Card has recently been taken over by Barclay's, well I will not be using that again in a hurry.
Load of bankers. :rant2:
Quote from: Malc on Jun 12, 2008, 11:09:34
But Rik, you have up to date AV, so it won't affect you?
They don't see it that way, Malc.
Quote from: somanyholes on Jun 12, 2008, 11:13:00
it's probably best to just transfer some money into a debit account setup for the purpose, just before you make a purchase so there's sod all in there for them to take, personal opinion anyway.
I'm thinking about going back to payment by cheque.
Quote from: Inactive on Jun 12, 2008, 11:15:48
That is outrageous Rik, you have done nothing wrong, yet Barclay's are behaving in this manner.. :mad:
It's the lack of communication that'd driving me nuts, In. They appear to have switched to offshore call centres and no-one is interested. Luckily, I've found someone willing to take ownership of the problem in a small, UK-based, department. A letter to the CEO will be following when I've got it settled. I've only been a customer for 37 years!!
Quote from: Rik on Jun 12, 2008, 11:20:12
I've only been a customer for 37 years!!
Which means SFA to them, you are just a number.
I use cash for High Street and petrol shopping these days, I know that has it's own risks, but they can only take what I have in my wallet.
It's the way I see things moving, In, with a return to cheques for MO and payment of bills. :(
That really would " put the cat amongst the pigeons " .. Rik. Think of the cost of all of the extra staff that would entail.
My thoughts exactly. >:D
They don't even like taking cash these days because of the cost of secure transit, one of my friends was refused his offer of cash on a new car purchase for this very reason.
Rik, I would be seriously thinking of switching from Barclaycard, if this is their attitude. Many cards offer full online protection, and you might even get a low or zero interest introductionary deal into the bargain.
I tend to agree Simon, when my card was compromised, SAGA were brilliant about it, they rang me, said don't worry about it, it will not cost you anything, sent out a new card in a few days..sorted.
Same here with Halifax and Virgin cards, both of which have been 'done'.
Quote from: Simon on Jun 12, 2008, 11:59:58
Rik, I would be seriously thinking of switching from Barclaycard, if this is their attitude. Many cards offer full online protection, and you might even get a low or zero interest introductionary deal into the bargain.
The first time my card was compromised I had no problems. This seems to be an issue of someone taking responsibility and acting. I'll be having words with the CEO later. Meantime, I'll just switch to another of my accounts, and Barclaycard can lose the money they make from my use of the card. :)
Quote from: Rik on Jun 12, 2008, 11:17:48
I'm thinking about going back to payment by cheque.
There's not that many people will accept them now, at least for amounts greater than £100 or whatever the guarantee limit is.
We could reach a stalemate, where customers refuse to use perceived unsafe payment methods, and merchants refuse to accepy perceived unsafe payment methods from their pov. Could make life interesting for the retail sector.
An interesting point which hasn't yet come up is what happens if, like me, you use a Mac? Few people use AV on a Mac and AFAIK there are no anti-spyware products around.
Judging from reports of the Apple Developer conference this week, Apple may be trying to move to a model similar to the one for the iPhone, where all apps are digitally signed and anything not signed will refuse to run. Problem is this means all apps coming via Apple, at least it does for the iPhone.
It's a fair point Tacitus, and one I was just about to make as well. I do all my online finances / transactions running Firefox under Linux, as I am lead to believe that it is a much safer combination to use compared to the usual Windows options. Not foolproof for sure, but as you say, the AV scanners for Linux tend to be ones which intercept Windows viruses so that you don't foul up any Windows machines you might be file-sharing with.
Probably time to try and dig out a copy of the online banking code so that these details can be clarified.
Right I'll have to write my own AV software, of course it won't be very effective (in fact it'll do nothing at all) but at least it will always be up to date ;D
Seriously if they want to ensure that their customers are using approved AV software then they should supply it themselves.
Quote from: john on Jun 12, 2008, 14:03:12
Seriously if they want to ensure that their customers are using approved AV software then they should supply it themselves.
I believe that some do John.
Unfortunately in todays society, if you don't have a credit card or a bank account you do not officially exist.
Fiscally speaking. ;)
Yeah, I bet you still exist on the Inland Revenue's Data Base. ;D
They've been very quiet lately. :)
Too busy working out the GB payback payments Rik.. ;D
I reckon they're trying to lull me into a false sense of security. Either that or Den and Niall have been round to sort them out for me. ;D
or they lost the disk with your data on it :whistle:
That thought had gone through my mind. ;D
Quote from: john on Jun 12, 2008, 14:03:12Seriously if they want to ensure that their customers are using approved AV software then they should supply it themselves.
I wouldn't be too happy being told what software I can and can't use on my machine. Sure, ensure customers use AV software, but if they are going down the 'approved brands' route, won't it just go to the software company who pays the most for an 'approved' badge?
Quote from: Mouseroo on Jun 12, 2008, 13:53:41
It's a fair point Tacitus, and one I was just about to make as well. I do all my online finances / transactions running Firefox under Linux, as I am lead to believe that it is a much safer combination to use compared to the usual Windows options. Not foolproof for sure, but as you say, the AV scanners for Linux tend to be ones which intercept Windows viruses so that you don't foul up any Windows machines you might be file-sharing with.
Exactly... I do the same. I've only had one incident (in 2000) when some dodgy piece of javascript managed to change my homepage. To my knowledge, I've never had a significant compromise of a Linux machine.
I'm just waiting for a card to get compromised, the bank to unilaterally decide it must have happened online, some brainless idiot in a call centre not to understand that Linux doesn't need antivirus because there are no viable virii and then to claim I am liable because I have been negligent in not having antivirus.
I guess the two options will be to have an up to date antivirus on my windows partition and to just tell them I have Synamtec or AVG or to install one of the Linux AV scanners for Windows. There again they have to prove I didn't make that purchase on the one Windows machine in the place (which does have AV)
I wonder how long it will be before Windows users have to buy an AV product that their bank recognises in order to be protected.
On the subject of Apple signing all apps I think the headline could be rewritten "Apple contemplate suicide." I find it hard to imagine many people buying a computer that will only run approved software. You might as well buy an XBox or a Wii. I'm sure the recording industry would like the idea of p2p apps not being able to exist and being able to sue Apple if they certify any though.
Quote from: Dangerjunkie on Jun 13, 2008, 00:27:19
...some brainless idiot in a call centre not to understand that Linux doesn't need antivirus because there are no viable virii and then to claim I am liable because I have been negligent in not having antivirus.
Sorry Dangerjunkie there are viruses for Linux too :
http://www.sophos.com/pressoffice/news/articles/2008/02/rstbtool.html (http://www.sophos.com/pressoffice/news/articles/2008/02/rstbtool.html)
http://www.zdnet.co.uk/tsearch/linux+virus.htm (http://www.zdnet.co.uk/tsearch/linux+virus.htm)
(also the use of 'virii' as the plural of virus is a bit contentious to say the least see : http://linuxmafia.com/~rick/faq/plural-of-virus.html) (http://linuxmafia.com/~rick/faq/plural-of-virus.html)
Quote from: Dangerjunkie on Jun 13, 2008, 00:27:19
On the subject of Apple signing all apps I think the headline could be rewritten "Apple contemplate suicide." I find it hard to imagine many people buying a computer that will only run approved software. You might as well buy an XBox or a Wii. I'm sure the recording industry would like the idea of p2p apps not being able to exist and being able to sue Apple if they certify any though.
I'm inclined to agree, but with the rise in malware perhaps we shouldn't condemn it out of hand. It might be that
only signed apps will run, but you would need to register with Apple to get a sig. You could distribute it how you like - anything unsigned is run at the end user's own risk. That might be a viable proposition.
We're already discussing the banks making it compulsory to have AV installed so I can see things going along this road as security becomes an ever larger issue.
Quote from: Rik on Jun 12, 2008, 12:36:12
We could reach a stalemate, where customers refuse to use perceived unsafe payment methods, and merchants refuse to accepy perceived unsafe payment methods from their pov. Could make life interesting for the retail sector.
That's a very good point Rik - and the retail sector will
have to back down cos they need our money more than we need their goods. :)
As for the banking sector, if they start making things really difficult for their customers, the ir customers can make it even more difficult for them by going back to using branches, writing cheques where possible, using more cash etc.
Exactly, shall we put a candidate up in the forthcoming by-election on a 'safe money' ticket? ;D