LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksEveryone could just join the Darkside, install Win 10, and run Spartan
/runs and hides from the torches and pitchforks...
Everyone could just join the Darkside, install Win 10, and run Spartan
/runs and hides from the torches and pitchforks...
Esse Quam Videri
Out on the road today I saw a Black Flag Sticker on a Cadillac...
Might aswell uninstall any anti virus and spyware detection programs while you are at it.Originally Posted by cheesemp
I don't use anything else! (Well except IE8 for the work intranet)
Seems useful to me - I want to get gmail pop ups in the same way as outlook. Previously I use to need to keep the tab open - With this I won't need to.
??? - Not sure what you're getting at here. These popups will only appear if I authorise them so how is that a security risk? I'd only authorise them for gmail/inbox. If you're having a go at Chrome's security then I'd love to know why as I've had an issue on 10's of PC's I've used/recommended it for (unlike old IE).
I've heard that Tor is actually a great browser for online banking as the annonymity in the routing helps add security. But you need to be careful what addons you use with it.Thanks for that - worth a look - especially as it's cross-platform (which I need).
Strangely enough my objection to FF is that it's a bit ... bulky. I actually use FF on Windows exclusively for banking (heavily loaded with ABP etc) - mainly because I'd trust IE with that as far as Saracen would trust Chrome.
There's actually sites on the corporate intranet that work better with Firefox, maybe that's why corporate IT have stopped swearing "IE only". And a themed FF looks way better than IE11...
Opera and Dolphin might be worth a look on the HTC1.
You also need to be sure the bank you're dealing with plays nice with a Mozilla variant - more than a few here in the US do not. There's also been reports of service being denied because the traffic was being reported as coming in from a foreign source, complete with the further headaches that entails.
It's a great service for what it was originally meant for - anonymous surfing/posting in countries where some activities will get you and your head separated. People have added a few unintended uses along the way, and those things it's only mediocre at.
Chrome has a history of spying on it's users. Luckily each time google has been caught out, they have made it opt in, instead of opt out.
Data collection is google's main business. Always has been, always will.
Um, I neither trust nor distrust Chrome for internet banking. I just don't trust internet banking.
I know I'm a bit anachronistic on this (and yeah, before someone says it, not just on this) but on I-banking, I come from a perspective of .... does it offer me anything I need? And my answer is, no, it doesn't. For lots of people maybe it does, and fair enough, but for me it doesn't. At best, it offers minor conveniences.
Then, what about risks? Well, having had some scumbag attempt to set up internet access on my bank accounts (caught and stopped by the bank), and they no doubt would have drained the account if they'd got access, there are suvstantial risks.
So for me, a simple cost/benefit analysis makes it a no-brainer .... I neither need nor especially want I-banking, so I have wriiten confirmation from my banks that ANY form of I-banking (or phone banking) is permanently disabled and can ONLY be reactivated by me, in person, at specified branches, with specified proof of ID, including passport.
It's not Chrome that I distrust for I-banking. It's I-banking in general. I don't trust or distrust Chrome any more or less than any other browser for that.
There's two trust issues for me. The i-banking one is about fundamental criminality and even I don't think that's Google's game. My distrust (and detestation) of Google is about intrusion into and breach of my right to privacy.
On the criminality front and I-banking, it's not even just about browsers. Can you be sure, 100% categorically certain, that you don't have any malware, viruses, etc on your computers? I can't. I don't think I have, and I'm pretty thoroughly patched, and have up-to-date AV and anti-malware stuff running, but again, as with my view on data privacy, the only way to be sure data or banking isn't abused is to not put it out there in the first place, and the cost/benefit analysis says that for me, the risks aren't worth running.
By risks, I mean that IF my bank accounts were compromised, the hassle, time and inconvenience of sorting out the problem far outweight the benefit I'd get from I-banking in the first place. It's not necessarily even about losing money, which I may not, but about the short-term hassles.
I use firefox at home, ie8 is forced upon us at work to which I use chrome for none work stuff as its the only one I could install without admin rights.
My phone is IE as its a windows phone, but it works great so no complaints.
Actually you misunderstand me - I'd assumed (correctly it would seem) that you were an avoider of internet banking. In which case IE, Chrome, FF, Lynx ... it makes no difference because you don't "iBank".
What I was meaning that you'd trust Chrome for no web activities. Your boxes remain unshiny - no Chrome...
As to iBanking - yes I use it, but mainly because of the convenience of tracking my expenditures (I'm on a penny counting exercise at the moment) but also because of branch closures (iBank or a 40 minute round trip and a couple of quid for parking). Strangely enough, my missus commented the other day that while I'm happy to grab mouse and go at it, my attitude to mobile (i.e. phone-based) banking seems very negative. Which, as she pointed out, is a bit strange on the face of it.
Career status: still enjoying my new career in DevOps, but it's keeping me busy...
People need to realize that the old skool standard theft is much easier than online backing 'hacking'.
Phone and branch banking requires 1 stage authentication, when online banking requires 2 or more.
You're right. Twice. I read it as not trusting Chrome for net banking. In fact, yup, I don't trust Chrome. Or rather, I don't trust Google, and therefore won't even give chrome a try. Of course, that started out with the rights grab Google initially put into Chrome's T&Cs, and then tried to explain away as an amateur-hour "oversight" - an explanation I bought into not even for a nanosecond.
And, yup, I don't trust iBanking, or at least, not enough to need it. Though where I'm coming from is different. With Chrome, I neither like nor trust the etjics of the company behind it. With internet banking, it's not about ethics but about risk versus oerceived benefit. For me, the perceived benefit is very low, very low indeed. I simply have no need for or interest in most of the conveniences. And given such low benefit, it doesn't need much risk to outweigh it.
BUT .... I entirely understand that for many people, the benefits are larger. For instance, I can walk to my bank branch in 15 minutes, and it's about 30 seconds from where I do much of my regular shopping. Even so, I doubt I go in more than half a dozen times a year. And, most days, my time is entirely my own, so I can do shopping when it suits me, not just when work commitments let me. My lifestyle is not, I'm sure, unique by any means, but I am in a minority, and one not available to most employed people. It's a side-effect of being semi-retired, and self-employed when I work.
On the face of it, maybe, but on closer examination, not so sure.
IMHO, there's a different class of risks on mobiles. That being, a VERY large number of apps demand permissions which woukd alliw them to do things I would vehemently object to. Sometimes, but by no means always, there's a legit readon for those permissions as well, though that doesn't preclude a wayward app using them both in legit and objectionable ways.
With a PC, though, I can be MUCH more certain of the size and scope of the minefield. For instance, I can boot my PC in any one of a number of configurations, including either from, say, a Linux boot CD, or from a clean install OS which is ONLY used for banking, with NO other apps, beyond firewall, and perhaps, AV. So I could boot from a dedicated HD, or whatever, do banking, then lock that drive away again.
I COULD organise online banking in a relatively secure way on a PC, and would be much more comfortable than I would on a mobile. I don't do either, because I don't need to, but if I did, I'd view cautious PC banking as less inherently risky than mobile banking, though arguably the cost is less convenience, too. Some people more or less run their lives on smartphones. Fair enough, their life, their choice. It's not for me, though. Don't need to, and don't want to.
If "people" means me, I do realise that. But to do "branch" theft means physically being in a branch, and sometimes, a specific branch. The risk to the thief goes way, WAY up at that point, and it's harder to access my branch account from Russia, China, Nigeria or wherever. Also, check your online and/or phone banking T&Cs. Last time I looked, there were subtle differences especially in relation to burcen of proof for "unauthorised" trsnsactions.
And .... well, we're starting yo get into an area where I'm not comfortable going into detail but, let's just say that getting into my 'day to day' account illicitly would gain a crook relatively little. But it's fed from other accounts where you need to be in MY branch, WITH specified proof of ID. There is NO online, phone, etc access to those accounts except by physically presence if authorised individuals.
Oh, and no phone access to anything. Or to put that another way, I have written assurances from the bank that online, phone etc is completely locked off, meaning that if it did happen, there's no possibility of dispute over whether transactions made that way are authorised, because they explicitly are not. It will be the bank's liability, which gives them good reason to ensure it doesn't.
This particular "people" does understand that, not least from some years working in the industry supplying computer facilities to banks. If you've drawn cash out of cash dispensers, there's a decent chance it used software I wrote. Well, co-wrote, as the entire code was by no means mine.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
