Most Bank Websites Are Insecure
Anonymous writes "More than three-quarters of bank Web sites have design flaws that could expose bank customers to financial loss or identity theft, according to a University of Michigan study that will be presented this week at the Symposium on Usable Security and Privacy.
The study, 'Analyzing Web Sites For User-Visible Security Design Flaws,' examined 214 bank Web sites in 2006. It was conducted by University of Michigan computer science professor Atul Prakash and doctoral students Laura Falk and Kevin Borders."
It is actually a surprise, earlier the banks would just cover the damages caused. But with the current global economy it is actually a bit surprising that the banks are letting this happen.
But then again they might not - the study is from 06 and those were diffent times for banks.
If this report makes it any harder to login to my account I am going to have to find the publishers, and beat them.
My current bank forced me to select 6 questions, many of which there were no choices I knew the answer to, but that someone stealing my identity could find.
When one of these comes up that I can't answer I call the customer service, and am verified by my mothers maiden name. Defeating the purpose of all the questions anyway.
Also, my user-name is not a password, don't make me change it to one.
Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
Having worked in the banking industry for nearly a decade, I was a bit skeptical. Many times we will have some security firm come in and look at our public facing web site, and come back with a list of 25-30 items that are 'security issues'. Most of them are complete crap, and maybe 1 or 2 are legitimate concerns. Management gets in a tizzy and insists that all items must be addressed, even when many items make no sense or are even counterproductive to implement.
I skimmed the underlying study (the article itself was worthless except for the link), and some of the concerns are very valid. For example, I have NO idea why a bank wouldn't insist on using SSL for any banking transaction.
See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
and was filed from a Caribbean island.
simon
The physical bank location isn't 100% secure either.
Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
Since if I enter my username (composed from my real name) and an incorrect password three times, it locks me out.
I say "my" username, but if I enter any username - easily deductible by composing any two first and last names - and an incorrect password three times... that account gets locked out.
I'm sure that nobody with malice aforethought, a dictionary of names, and a frisky Perl script will ever feel the urge to increase every customers' security by having them locked out.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
I had to call my ISP the other day (Virgin Media, because they're thieving, lying cheats), and had to go through the usual name, address and phone number. Then they asked me for my security password. I gave the wrong answer and the lady on the other end of the phone said the following:
"It's usually your mother's maiden name"
What the fuck?! Are you kidding me?! That's secure isn't it, giving me hints!
"What's your house number?"
"Erm, 11"
"Ooh, 1 out, try again"
"Er... 10?"
"Other way, dear"
"12?"
"OK, great. What can I do for you today Mr. Smith?"
Summation 2
Banks are protected from their mistakes by the US Federal Reserve.
Profits always get privatized, banker's mistakes often get nationalized. The private citizen always gets stuck with bailing the banks out but gets little or no benefit from profits since these shipped of to tax havens like Lichtenstein. Which makes it all the more gratifying when something like this happens.
1) I believe that would be the lesser of their account balance or $100,000
2) It looks like GP said the institution is protected, not the customer
...bill collectors with wrong phone numbers.
I had one call my phone asking for someone I had never heard of. I was bored and I played along. They asked for my SSN, I told them I forgot and asked them if they could tell me what it was...they did!
So I had this random lady's name and SSN. I also told them I had a new address and gave them the white house address.
One last thing: Sometimes I wonder; "Is that someone's signature? Or do they type that at the end of each post?"
In that case I don't see how it was the bank's fault in any way.. using an internet café for banking (in Nigeria of all places, famous for 419 scams..) doesn't strike me as the best idea in the world. Even if the keyboards are glued in so that people can't attach keyloggers and whatnot, someone could have setup a mini camera, or perhaps the owner of the café has installed monitoring software that allows him to record everything.. she'd be better off with a WiFi enabled PDA or something at least?
which is totally what she said