How long!? It’s the reason I left HSBC! That and their god awful app.
True. I use my old Smile account card reader with RBS so there is a positive of cross compatibility.
I’ve not been able to log in with my First Direct smartkey for 2 months because I haven’t rang to reset it yet when my iPhone was reset. I’ll only need to do that when my 5% regular saver ends so I’m in no rush.
Nationwide down for planned maintensnce yet again, not back until 15.00. Bad enough in the UK but if you are in say SEAsia its offline for most of your waking hours.
Nationwide app wont let you create new payees, to do so yoi have to use web site.
1 Like
Barclays app has been down loads as well
No email clients clearly display whether DKIM is present/valid, and having none or bad DKIM signatures isn’t a clear signal that the email is bad as some legitimate email still doesn’t have DKIM (so your email provider won’t always classify it as spam even if DKIM is bad).
Not to mention social engineering - just register a domain close enough to the real thing and you’ll be able to send fully authenticated mail that still looks convincing.
Mine does! But yes, a lot of clients do poorly here. This isn’t a problem with the spec, moreso broken email clients not allowing users to make an informed decision.
Well sure, but this is also a problem with TLS and DV certs (he’ll probably EV certs too in some circumstances). There’s not an easy fix for this.
1 Like
To be honest there is an easy fix for this - banks should stop being so nice to careless people - if you loose money due to a phishing email or malware it should be your fault. You’ll see how quick everyone will learn to be careful.
You wouldn’t trust a random guy in the street with a name tag/badge with your bank’s branding asking for your account details, right? Why would you trust an email from a random domain (computer equivalent of the random guy)?
I actually had this situation with one of my friends - we were talking about malware and she was amazed how “paranoid” I was, and told me that her parents had their credit card compromised and simply called the bank to reverse the transactions and was done with it - apparently the fact that malware was still present on their computer didn’t bother them at all. This would’ve played out differently if the bank didn’t reverse the transactions.
If you inadvertently left an upstairs window open and got burgled as a result, would you expect the police to take a report and investigate any arising lines of enquiry?
Or should they tell you that it’s your fault and they’ll not be recording the crime?
Police investigate but don’t magically give you your stuff back - banks do straight away.
Banks refund the transactions because it’s easier, cheaper and quicker than investigating the fraudsters.
Is that a good solution though? This benefits the fraudsters more than anyone else and allows them to continue committing crime with impunity.
Of course it’s not. But it is expedient for the banks to do this.
You’re objecting to the victims of crime being reimbursed by the banks because of your perceived or real lack of the victim’s personal responsibility.
Would I be right in thinking you’re quite young? Technically literate having grown up with computers and the internet? Not everyone is as familiar with the technology as you and I. Many are less savvy and there need to be safeguards in place.
1 Like
Indeed I am quite young and tech-savvy, and I am not advocating for zero safeguards, just not that many safeguards that allow people to be completely careless. I think there’s a middle ground where people can make mistakes while still learning from them. Something like only reimbursing up to 90% so a single instance of fraud wouldn’t instantly wipe out your entire financial life while still being enough of a deterrent to push users to be more careful in the future.
I agree with you that careless people should take more personal responsibility.
There’s also a lot of people out there who just don’t really understand banking, the internet, computers, etc. The internet didn’t exist when they grew up and banking was always done during stupidly short hours on weekdays that closed for lunch and closed on Wednesday afternoons. (this can be abbreviated into the term the olden days)
They are easily fooled by phishing emails or social engineering.
Banks are complicit in this, when they phone up a customer and say It’s your bank, we have important information for you but first you must tell us your mother’s maiden name and some characters from your password so that we can confirm it’s you …despite already having your phone number and calling you, not the other way around.
No wonder some people are confused when banks behave in the same way as a fraudster wanting info.
What should be happening is the banks looking at their operations, systems, security and preventing the possibility of these scams.
You can’t just say that customers should not be paid out when becoming a victim of crime. The banks have a huge responsibility and a huge challenge to make their business safer for customers.
2 Likes
But business is safe for customers as long as they take proper precautions - at the end of they day if you’ve got malware on your machine then the bank can’t do anything against that - to the eyes of the bank you are the one doing the transactions.
Refunding all the lost money in this case means there’s no incentive for the defrauded user to actually secure themselves. Returning only a part of that money will have a huge incentive for the user as they don’t want to loose any more money.
I understand what you are saying.
Banks have to refund the customers, regardless or not of whether they’ve been careless (many are not careless but are victims), because bank systems are not designed to address some common frauds.
1 Like
You talk as if it is easy to keep malware out. Even sophisticated computer users get caught out, and there are plenty of 0-days out there that will get past pretty much any scanner.
Most people are not going to install qubes or such like. I’m pretty impressed with containers on firefox but getting it set up is not trivial even if it does go someway to preventing cross window/tab exploits.
1 Like
It’s not easy (the recent CCleaner update proves it - even big names like Microsoft and Cisco were hit) however I’m not talking about advanced malware like that - I’m talking about the low quality crap people install when clicking on malicious ads and stuff - that’s easy to keep out, just don’t click on the damn things and keep your system up to date.
Don’t click on ads? Haha. I try that with my partner, not to stop the adware mind you.
Adblock? 
post must be 20 characters