Community
The issue of customers being held liable for their losses if they don't have the latest antivirus and personal firewall installed is ridiculous when we see bank's sites with major security flaws that still leave their customers vulnerable regardless of which personal anti-virus or firewall software they use. The banks are the ones with the flaws and are creating the potential problems for their customers. I expect the courts will hold the banks liable for losses when it can be shown that the bank site is the vulnerable party and cause of the problem.
It seems those IT security guys dropped the ball when they found out the customers would be liable for their losses, lets face it fewer than 5% of customers have up-to-date protection. A smart barrister will be recovering those customer's funds in no time with bank sites not far behind their customers in the security stakes.
Many bank sites are vulnerable to multiple threats. Best check. Could be very embarrassing to be sued by a customer who'll easily be able to prove the bank was at fault. Not the sort of noise likely to attract new customers. Should we name them and the flaws? Fix it while I think about it.
This content is provided by an external author without editing by Finextra. It expresses the views and opinions of the author.
Edvards Margevics Co-partner at CONCRYT
30 August
Ellen Roberson Global Marketing Advisor, Risk, Fraud & Compliance at SAS
Patrick Bermingham CEO at Adflex
29 August
Ben Lane VP of Colleague Experience Group at American Express UK
28 August
Welcome to Finextra. We use cookies to help us to deliver our services. You may change your preferences at our Cookie Centre.
Please read our Privacy Policy.