This is another Blog that doesn't render fully on my IE6 browser. Firefox is OK though.
So... I doubt any testing can be completely secure, without checking the source of the appl which in itself is a black art.
Apps can contain trojans that don't activate for a long while or until a certain event is reached, and then can cache, email, log, forward a lot of information. Testing with network Sniffers just doesn't catch this delayed activity. You basically run the app on trust, the same way as you use OnLine banking systems on trust.
Apps are a problem though because people blindly accept the Ts&Cs and small print, the same as they do when installing PC software, or when signing a finance agreement. You want the service/cash - you sign the contract hoping its safe because understanding it all (or even having the time to read it) is not possible. So when the App says it needs access to your contacts, network access, location lookup access etc, you barely have a chance to understand why they need such things.
At least when the washng machine suffers a manufacturing fault, the manufacturer fixes or replaces it and probably covers you for any losses incurred as a result. Will your bank cover your mobile banking app in the same way?
03 Aug 2010 18:28 Read comment
Well congrats to dgarvey1 for topping the Finextra League. And also to ragingrooney for being the top Brit in the same.
I am happy with my first effort, but the trick seems to be to start well and keep hands on. I kept having players on the bench and missed points. Hey ho. Back to work.
14 Jul 2010 10:52 Read comment
I think the joined up thinking was basically PKI, but like X400 for email, it all got just too complicated to practically deliver. Sometime, somewhere, we will need Certification Authoritys that we actually trust to tell us who people are.
14 Jul 2010 10:12 Read comment
(the 'add comment' button disappeared on this blog for me, as did any comment Nick submitted. Maybe this one will clear it up).
Anyway, I recall this same observation last year (maybe from Bo Harald?), and I recall commenting. Hopefully I am saying the same thing! The overall tone being that it is indeed a fact of modern 'business etiquette' to allow this behaviour, and its a result of becoming reactive and email being treated like IM. Our management and customers expect near instant responses and the fact you are in a meeting is rarely acceptable.
Of course, the way to control it is for the meeting owner to lay down the terms of the meeting at the outset. Weak meeting management is as much to blame as poor manners. Lets face it, there are plenty of meetings where the incoming communique is actually more important, and that's why the behaviour was allowed in the first place. Admittedly, the interruptions now are often more mundane, so it does need new meeting management techniques, clarifying what is permitted and even providing timed 'coffee'-breaks to allow the addiction to be sated. The Blackberry is particularly tempting.
At the end of the day, the genie is out of the bottle and we have to live and deal with it. There are upsides too.
26 Jun 2010 22:12 Read comment
I 'only' have 4 separate mobile contracts! None of them for iPhone/iPad and I am disappointed how the mobile operators are moving completely in the wrong direction for consumers. I don't mind the pay-for-what-you-use model, but make it reasonable. Its getting more expensive.
Yes, they have bandwidth issues, and there is more pressure and costs at the 'local loop / radio interface' bottleneck than their fixed line counter parts. But charging £10 for a 1.5GB Data topup is crazy. I could rent 4 DVD movies for that money or pay half my monthly unlimited broadband. Its the same with Roaming charges - they actively discourage the use of their device abroad - just look at all the hints for working around it, including using WiFi and VoIP.
When i look at the monthly costs of my 4 devices, is it good value? Absolutely not.
22 Jun 2010 12:46 Read comment
I was about to assume that you were going to make a technical/picky point about security, but yep, it looks pretty dumb. But wait. Sending a password in the clear is pretty standard for such an account (a reminder might have been marginally better [if there was one]. Or if they didn't trust the integrity of the email sender then they could have generated a new password, which wouldn't expose a potential 'friendly' password and would allow you to set it back to one you prefer.
The obvious thing here, I would think, would have been for them to send you a text with the reminder/password! Some encryption at least, and they are the phone company.
22 Jun 2010 12:19 Read comment
Yep. Keep it going. I consider myself more Telecoms than Financial Services, but Finextra is still a regular visit for me and keeps me up to date. Lets have more debate and opinion and keep challenging the status quo. Good luck with the next 10.
21 Jun 2010 09:49 Read comment
I'm in! Let's see if beginners luck will rule the league :)
10 Jun 2010 17:41 Read comment
Not bad. Probably out in 6 months and free meals too - that's almost a politicians salary, but with a criminal record to boot.
What a crazy silly system.
02 Jun 2010 12:48 Read comment
Maybe, but doesn't the current level of profits suggest that even in crunch times these established monopolies make bigger margins not less, albeit on lower volume? They don't compete on a level playing ground and so don't have to compete in the Social Networking game. In fact, its ironic that in these tougher times have made the traditional lenders much more powerful, not less, and so even less likely to listen to the consumer.
21 May 2010 14:31 Read comment
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.