Bank refuse to compensate for online fraud

[talos2]

Unfortunately in todays society, if you don't have a credit card or a bank account you do not officially exist.

[Rik]

Fiscally speaking.

[Inactive]

Yeah, I bet you still exist on the Inland Revenue's Data Base.

[Rik]

They've been very quiet lately.

[Inactive]

Too busy working out the GB payback payments Rik..

[Rik]

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.

[ST Driver]

or they lost the disk with your data on it

[Rik]

That thought had gone through my mind.

[Simon]

Seriously 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?

[Dangerjunkie]

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.

[john]

...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.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)

[Tacitus]

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.

[madasahatter]

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.

[Rik]

Exactly, shall we put a candidate up in the forthcoming by-election on a 'safe money' ticket?