Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2017 12:56:43 +0100 From: =?utf-8?Q?Dag-Erling_Sm=C3=B8rgrav?= <des@des.no> To: Michelle Sullivan <michelle@sorbs.net> Cc: Yuri <yuri@rawbw.com>, Igor Mozolevsky <mozolevsky@gmail.com>, freebsd security <freebsd-security@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: http subversion URLs should be discontinued in favor of https URLs Message-ID: <86h8swgnwk.fsf@desk.des.no> In-Reply-To: <5A2DB9F8.1040301@sorbs.net> (Michelle Sullivan's message of "Mon, 11 Dec 2017 09:49:28 %2B1100") References: <97f76231-dace-10c4-cab2-08e5e0d792b5@rawbw.com> <5A2709F6.8030106@grosbein.net> <11532fe7-024d-ba14-0daf-b97282265ec6@rawbw.com> <8788fb0d-4ee9-968a-1e33-e3bd84ffb892@heuristicsystems.com.au> <20171205220849.GH9701@gmail.com> <20171205231845.5028d01d@gumby.homeunix.com> <CADWvR2gVn8H5h6LYB5ddwUHYwDtiLCuYndsXhJywi7Q9vNsYvw@mail.gmail.com> <20171210173222.GF5901@funkthat.com> <CADWvR2iGQOtcU=FnU-fNsso2eLCCQn=swnOLoqws%2B33V8VzX1Q@mail.gmail.com> <5c810101-9092-7665-d623-275c15d4612b@rawbw.com> <CADWvR2j_LLEPKnSynRRmP4LG3mypdkNitwg%2B7vSh=iuJ=JU09Q@mail.gmail.com> <fd888f6b-bf16-f029-06d3-9a9b754dc676@rawbw.com> <CADWvR2jnxVwXmTA9XpZhGYnCAhFVifqqx2MvYeSeHmYEybaNnA@mail.gmail.com> <19bd6d57-4fa6-24d4-6262-37e1487d7ed6@rawbw.com> <CADWvR2gkFGY8CH5L7N67z8mfOux=Vjv8eobpK=pOpCKW3ysAkA@mail.gmail.com> <913910fb-723b-e450-8f02-4c26b3c15287@rawbw.com> <CADWvR2hR2-DPayNVOUvTxMQ=tj7YpotVzKFHGQFPoC5ZGDvnNA@mail.gmail.com> <898df78d-c0b1-9e9f-0630-2665c3939960@rawbw.com> <5A2DB9F8.1040301@sorbs.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Michelle Sullivan <michelle@sorbs.net> writes: > User gets an email saying his banking details are compromised, and to > update them now. User clicks the link and gives banking details to > phishing site as well as having a keylogger and rootkit installed > during the process. User has bank account hacked. Where did the bank > go wrong? Banks and financial institutions have whole teams working 24/7, usually in cooperation with national authorities, to detect, investigate and shut down phishing campaigns, and to warn customers (either directly or through mass media) of particularly large or well-executed campaigns. In the EU and EEA, banks are liable for losses in excess of =E2=82=AC150 un= less the customer acted =E2=80=9Cwith intent or gross negligence=E2=80=9D, but t= he definition of =E2=80=9Cgross negligence=E2=80=9D is fluid. Legal precedent in Norway = is to hold the customer liable only if the email was =E2=80=9Can obvious forgery=E2=80= =9D, for some definition of =E2=80=9Cobvious=E2=80=9D. TL;DR: yes, banks are held liable for losses attributable to phishing. Source: I do this for a living (although not at a bank). DES --=20 Dag-Erling Sm=C3=B8rgrav - des@des.no
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?86h8swgnwk.fsf>