Let's put it another way, online banking is great, but on the majority, it helps banks. The web channel is cheap.
On Wed, 29 Nov 2006, Drsolly wrote: > On Wed, 29 Nov 2006, Larry Seltzer wrote: > > > >>I would tell Aunty Gi, not to access her accounts online. > > > > Really, you think it's that bad? I think the benefits of online banking > > are so enormous that it's hard to blow it off like that. > > Yes, I think it's that bad. Until someone develops the Mark II bank that > can make this stuff secure, or the Mark II user who can avoid falling for > phishes, keystroke loggers and other scams, I don't see how online banking > is such a good idea. > > > If you were to tell Aunty Gi to ignore *all* mail purportedly from the > > bank, without exception, I doubt she would be in trouble with respect to > > online banking. The only real e-mails I've ever gotten from Bank of > > America have been informative, not critical. > > If "informative" means "I can ignore them because they aren't very > important", then ignoring them isn't going to matter much. But the problem > is, a stream of emails from your bank, gets you accustomed to > communicating with your bank via email. > > > > I'll quote Paul Vixie's recent email: > > "does this help you at all in understanding why banks should not use > e-mail to talk to customers?" > > _______________________________________________ > Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. > https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec > Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list. > _______________________________________________ Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
