Credit Card FRAUD Warning for online stores

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Paul M - ProSouth, Sep 23, 2004.

  1. Paul M - ProSouth

    Bok Guest

    There's always some form of biometric method such as voice
    identification, although I wouldn't consider that reliable, secure or
    immune from identity theft. Authentication is the easy part, I would
    imagine 'legally binding' non-repudiation would be more difficult to
    support. An authentication scheme on it's own is unlikely to change the
    onus of liability for a failed transaction (fraudulent or otherwise).

    Just some random thoughts - I'm no security expert ...
     
    Bok, Sep 27, 2004
    #21
    1. Advertisements

  2. Paul M - ProSouth

    David Pears Guest

    I deal with some of these issues in my job. I'm convinced that there
    is no technology that will allow non-repudiation of a transaction...
    in fact the whole idea of non-repudiation is a myth promoted by the
    makers or researchers of various authentication technologies.

    For any particular technology, there is at least one method for a
    fraudster to spoof the authentication. In which case the onus is on
    the person who has been defrauded to prove the identity of the
    defrauder, rather than the accused person having to prove that they
    didn't do it. Innocent until proved guilty, not vice versa.

    David
     
    David Pears, Sep 27, 2004
    #22
    1. Advertisements

  3. Paul M - ProSouth

    Bok Guest

    I'd agree with that.
    Strictly speaking non-repudiation is a legal process that can only be
    interpreted in a court of law. Security technology can at best provide
    admissable, but certainly not irrefutable evidence...
    It might be a myth, but at the same time various countries are
    developing legislation around PKI technology - the admissibility of
    electronic signatures, covering issues of liability, non-repudiation and
    related matters.
    True. Biometric authentication methods such as iris scans seem to be the
    strongest, but even a genetic (DNA based) signature will be able to be
    forged one day, if not now...
     
    Bok, Sep 28, 2004
    #23
  4. Paul M - ProSouth

    Damon Nomad Guest

    What made you bring that up?
    Supressed yearnings for Roger?
    But you will never get engaged will you 47XYY, will you?
     
    Damon Nomad, Oct 4, 2004
    #24
  5. That's a gutter lowlife troll, a very nasty thing to say to someone.
     
    Patrick Dunford, Oct 5, 2004
    #25
  6. Paul M - ProSouth

    Damon Nomad Guest

    But you don't deny it or even comment on the truth of it.
    To me the reception of what I post is secondary to its veracity.
    Anyway it is no worse than what you posted above, I am only
    guilty of descending to your level, I feel shame that I have done
    so.
     
    Damon Nomad, Oct 6, 2004
    #26
  7.  
    Patrick Dunford, Oct 7, 2004
    #27
  8. Paul M - ProSouth

    Damon Nomad Guest

     
    Damon Nomad, Oct 8, 2004
    #28
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.