- Joined
- Dec 30, 2010
- Messages
- 12,730
- Points
- 113
I am rather disturbed by the comments made recently by DBS, who claim to be the “safest bank in Asia” when they said the following.
“bank officials said its investigation into recent unauthorized withdrawals showed that anti-skimming devices had been breached in two ATMs along Bugis Street in late November”
“A total of 2,700 customers had their ATM cards compromised, but only 400 had unauthorized transactions amounting to S$500,000 deducted from their bank accounts via ATM machines in Malaysia on 4 and 5 January”
They said that the 2 ATMs were breached in November, and a total of 2,700 customers had their ATM cards compromised. 2,700 clients is really like a sore thumb sticking out, but why is it DBS waited till now to inform us of the breach?
When they said 2,700 customers had their ATM cards compromised, what does it mean, were there any fraudulent transactions that resulted in these 2,700 customers being classified as “compromised”?
Next they went on to provide this lame excuse.
“Karen Ngui, managing director and head group strategic marketing and communications at DBS, explained that all of its ATM machines around the island always had anti-skimming devices installed, but these were not 100 per cent fool-proof and “crooks could have bypassed the security measure”It seems that Karen Ngui, knows that the anti-skimming devices installed are not fool proof, yet why did she not flag it as an audit issue, and why were customers not informed that DBS was using a device that is not “fool proof” ?
Does this mean that all the anti-skimming devices installed at ATM’s today by DBS are rendered useless now, and we are vulnerable to similar attacks?
She also went on to say this.
“It is an unfortunate incident and it is clearly not a lapse in security, as similar skimming fraud incidents do occur once in a while to banks around the world,” said Ngui.
Since she is saying that this is “similar” and knows this occurs once in a while around the world, why is it DBS did not take a “lessons learnt” approach to prevent this from happening? This is not a lapse of security but a lapse of negligence, because DBS have firsthand knowledge of this happening around the world.
In a nutshell, this excuse sounds like the PAP “once in every fifty years” flood excuse, what if one day we were told a computer virus ate up our CPF and reserves, and the system is not 100 percent fool proof?
Singaporeans should not be fooled when parties claim to be “safest or best”, and we should not put all our eggs into one basket.
- http://www.tremeritus.com/2012/01/14/dbs-fiasco-negligence-or-security-lapse/
“bank officials said its investigation into recent unauthorized withdrawals showed that anti-skimming devices had been breached in two ATMs along Bugis Street in late November”
“A total of 2,700 customers had their ATM cards compromised, but only 400 had unauthorized transactions amounting to S$500,000 deducted from their bank accounts via ATM machines in Malaysia on 4 and 5 January”
They said that the 2 ATMs were breached in November, and a total of 2,700 customers had their ATM cards compromised. 2,700 clients is really like a sore thumb sticking out, but why is it DBS waited till now to inform us of the breach?
When they said 2,700 customers had their ATM cards compromised, what does it mean, were there any fraudulent transactions that resulted in these 2,700 customers being classified as “compromised”?
Next they went on to provide this lame excuse.
“Karen Ngui, managing director and head group strategic marketing and communications at DBS, explained that all of its ATM machines around the island always had anti-skimming devices installed, but these were not 100 per cent fool-proof and “crooks could have bypassed the security measure”It seems that Karen Ngui, knows that the anti-skimming devices installed are not fool proof, yet why did she not flag it as an audit issue, and why were customers not informed that DBS was using a device that is not “fool proof” ?
Does this mean that all the anti-skimming devices installed at ATM’s today by DBS are rendered useless now, and we are vulnerable to similar attacks?
She also went on to say this.
“It is an unfortunate incident and it is clearly not a lapse in security, as similar skimming fraud incidents do occur once in a while to banks around the world,” said Ngui.
Since she is saying that this is “similar” and knows this occurs once in a while around the world, why is it DBS did not take a “lessons learnt” approach to prevent this from happening? This is not a lapse of security but a lapse of negligence, because DBS have firsthand knowledge of this happening around the world.
In a nutshell, this excuse sounds like the PAP “once in every fifty years” flood excuse, what if one day we were told a computer virus ate up our CPF and reserves, and the system is not 100 percent fool proof?
Singaporeans should not be fooled when parties claim to be “safest or best”, and we should not put all our eggs into one basket.
- http://www.tremeritus.com/2012/01/14/dbs-fiasco-negligence-or-security-lapse/
