Re: [Sheflug] Re: bounce

[Will Newton <nospam [at] misconception.org.uk>]

On Wed, 10 Jan 2001, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:

> It has everything to do with it from the bank's point of view; the
> cracker most likely got in through exactly that broadcast medium.  It's
> much safer than physical entry, and can be automated.  Maybe even with
> help from the government or ISPs, as Richard would have it.

What stops a company from running their database server on the same
machine as a web facing httpd installation? So you post them your details
via snail mail and they get taken anyway. Once the company has your
details it is out of your hands IMO. They might like to take their
database and email it to their friends, you can't stop them.

> The point is that "internet" is a red button with banks for a wide
> variety of _correct_ reasons.  It puts them at risk an ways they can't
> quantify well, unlike the (now well-known) statistical probability of
> double-ticketing.

I think it's unfair to penalise the consumer when the merchants and the
banks are usually the weakest link in the process, and usually the source
of the leaks.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
Sheffield Linux User's Group - http://www.sheflug.co.uk
To unsubscribe from this list send mail to
- <sheflug-request [at] vuw.ac.nz> - with the word 
 "unsubscribe" in the body of the message. 

  GNU the choice of a complete generation.