Comments on: False security: Is Bank of America lying to its customers?
A bank that guarantees its online users safety and security has direct evidence that its Web-based banking system is not bullet-proof. Should that bank tells its users?
A bank that guarantees its online users safety and security has direct evidence that its Web-based banking system is not bullet-proof. Should that bank tells its users?
The Noisebridge hacker space offers sewing and Mandarin classes, soldering workshops, Internet-controlled front door access, and a server room with no door.
Photos: Circuits, code, community
roundup From Firefox to IE and from Chrome to Opera and Safari, there's no sitting still for browser makers looking to keep their products fresh and competitive.
Recent posts on technology, trends, and more.
Add this feed to your online news reader
While I was not aware of this vulnerability, I've always thought it wise to verify ssl credentials on every page, every time I do business online - whether on BofA's site or any other commercial site.
And to be aware of what I need to do to take advantage of BoA's $0 liability policy.
http://www.bankofamerica.com/onlinebanking/index.cfm?template=security
Is BofA lying? IMO, that depends on what they do when a customer falls victim to something like this.
The whole idea behind keeping your money in a bank vs. in your mattress is that a bank is secure. The banks are FDIC insured for accounts up to $100,000.00 which is higher now due to the economy. The issue these days is that we are getting our identity stolen right at the bank. Here is an example below of one who had over 200 accounts opened up under his name and a huge amount of cash...yes I said cash taken out of his account without having to verify a valid ID.
What is the answer? Do we keep our money in the mattress? Do we make the courts do something? Tell me your thoughts.....
http://o8justiceforall.wordpress.com
The difference between the face cream and the BOA statement is that in the face cream example, the outcome is wholey objective as to whether or not a person will look 20 years younger. Whereas the out come of the BOA statement is mostly objective. You can prove the opposite. Even if it is 99.9% safe then the assertion is not true, as you may have proved. However the problem for banks is that how much does it cost to get the extra .09999% reliability?. Then again that is what insurance is for.
This isn't a "bandwagon." It's now legally required that banks have two-factor authentication. There are a number of different types, but one of them must be used.
A guarantee is totally different from a marketing claim - it is dependent on the bank's actions in the case of a failure of their OLB security. You didn't provide any links, and maybe B of A does not state it explicitly, but I'm reasonably sure that they would make whole any customer who loses money due to a MITM attack that compromises its SiteKey.
The Government is balling out the banks for 700 Billion without investigating enough. The people who are losing their jobs and home needs the money, not the banks!
CAN SOMEONE PLEASE HELP ME? AS WELL AS OTHER VICTIMS BY THE BANKS.
It all started, in February 2006, with a not reported bonus of 200,000$ to my bookkeeper of 20 years has turned into a missing of hundreds of millions dollars in art, wine and cash by former trusted employees and Bank of America refuse to help me. In search for answers, I have begged my bank, Bank of America which I am client for over 15 years, to provide my complete file, canceled checks, deposits, withdrawals, interest earned, monthly statements, signature cards and corporate resolutions among others, for almost 3 years beginning February 2006 but to this day I have receive almost nothing.
After 5 subpoenas served on Bank of America I still do not have my documents. The officer of the local Bank of America has responded, on three different declarations under oath and penalty of pergery turned over everything but breach these declarations by continuing to produce documents in between each of them which is against the law. IS BANK OF AMERICA ABOVE THE LAW??? They have permitted cash withdraw in millions by others from my accounts and permitted opening of accounts in my name without my knowledge. Over 25 accounts were unknown to me until June 2008. How could Bank of America do this? Is this the consequences of corruption? Or a major cover up?
I am still without answers and the bank continues to withhold my complete files. All my rights are violated and the Government must do justice. There are hundred millions of dollars missing from my accounts. I believe only the Government can force them to comply. For almost three years, I have requested, by writing, the IRS to help me on this matter and to audit me but I have not yet received an answer.
PERHAPS, NOW, SOMEONE WILL FINALLY LISTEN!
IS THIS DONE TO ALL THEIR CLIENTS?
http://o8justiceforall.wordpress.com/2008/12/15/bank-of-america-are-they-above-the-law/
from steven in san francisco
http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/02/bank-of-america.html
What I find absolutely disgusting is that they are being bailed out yet again buy us ...the tax payer....not like the media...the government said it is a "government" bail out....who do they think pays for the government?
Do a search on Google for Bank of America identity theft you will find over 600 thousand hits as I did. They are not only pulling the preverbial wool over the consumers eyes they are even suing customers who have had their identity stolen through Bank of America...What judge is allowing this?
http://digg.com/business_finance/Bank_Of_America_Sues_ID_Theft_Victim_For_23_312_04_2
I have another case below where they "Bank of America" has allowed over 200 accounts to be opened under one person without so much as verifying to the real person that this was them through signature card, valid ID or anything....
http://o8justiceforall.wordpress.com/
So what is the customer supposed to do?
IF BANK OF AMERICA STOCK FALLS BELOW $5 PER SHARE, RULES OF INSTITUTIONAL OWNERS MAY REQUIRE THEM TO SELL THEIR BAC HOLDINGS. THE OTHER DAY THE STOCK CLOSED AT $5.10, APPARENTLY REFLECTING THE SCRAMBLING BY SOME TO SUPPORT THE STOCK PRICE.
ACCORDING TO TEH "SHORTSQUEEZE.COM" WEBSITE, 44.10% OF BAC IS HELD BY INSTITUTIONAL LENDS. WHILE SOME DO NOT HAVE THE $5 PER SHARE LIMIT RULE, THE SELL OFF OF BAC COULD BE MASSIVE IF THE STOCK GOES BELOW $5, SENDING BAC PLUNGING TO GREATER LOWS.
BAC HAS TREATED ITS CUSTOMERS IN INAPPROPRIATE WAYS FOR A LONG TIME. FRANKLY, I WAS ONE OF THOSE CUSTOMERS LIKE MANY OTHERS ACROSS THE US. IF BAC FELL, DEPOSITERS WOULD TAKE A LOT OF THEIR MONEY TO LOCAL BANKS, BANKS WHO ARE IN FACT LENDING AND SUPPORTING THE US ECONOMY. IT IS TIME FOR BAC TO GO!!!
SHORT SELL IT NOW. WHILE THE ELECTION IS OVER, YOU CAN VOTE BAC OUT WITH YOUR DOLLARS. EACH ONE OF YOUR DOLLARS IS A VOTE. EVEN IF YOU CAN ONLY AFFORD TO SHORT SELL A FEW DOLLARS OF THE STOCK IT COUNTS.
REMEMBER OBAMA GOT ELECTED BECAUSE MANY OF US SUPPORTED HIM WITH JUST A FEW DOLLARS. VOTE BAC OUT TODAY
tell them, you will not reelect them unless they make these banks stop ripping off the American people. It's
only going to get worse, unless we stop them now. The greedy rich are rotting this country from within. The banks are the tools of the rich to wipe out the middle class. Wake up America
I would run for the hills with Bof A, Wells, or Chase. They are all in cahoots to further destroy our economy by patently refusing to participate in the economic engine of fair credit markets.
Here is a great resource for home ownership: Reunion Mortgage in California. No nonsense and completely a Federal Loan resource. Something B of A could learn from.
And this comments on safety. I have one of these electronic keys. Problem is if I lose it end of account management in QuickBooks. I am not impressed with these keys. There has to be another solution.
- by articlebillboar November 16, 2009 11:28 PM PST
- Nice and informative <a href="http://www.ArticleBillboard.com">refinance, mortgage, marketing</a> tips and information. These should be helpful for my users.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(17 Comments)Gia