IBM to Acquire Trusteer

You may be correct that they use Rapport to create usage profiles. The banks would probably say this is for customer protection in the same way that they respond to "unusual" credit card activity - I would think that's at least partially true - but as to "denial of account reimbursement for fraud activity" has that ever happened to date? I could see it if it involved a corporate customer and the amount was large, but otherwise they don't seem to care.

 

I was also looking for that info, thanks. But it´s really weird to pay that much for a company like Trusteer, it´s almost like IBM doesn´t even care.

As for the consumer product, seriously, I have never read a positive user review about Trusteer Rapport, that´s why I decided not to install.

Looks like junk to me.

 

There is no universal industry backed protections for checking and savings accounts like there is for debit and credit cards. Those protections are provided by the card issurers with debit card protection being weaker than that provided for credit cards.

For bank and other financial related accounts, it is extemely important that individuals throughly read the account usage agreements provided by their financial instituation. Also note that non-banking entities such as investment organizations may offer signifigantly less protection to online activities.

 

There was a long thread about Trusteer Rapport last year here:

https://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=333451&highlight=Trusteer Rapport

There have been compatibility and performance issues, but what I consider more serious was the unwillingness of Trusteer to address the demonstration where Rapport was bypassed. Vendors who cannot acknowledge that their products are imperfect don't inspire confidence.

 

I agree that it's important not to take anything for granted. If a financial institution is not legally obligated to do something then sooner or later they won't do it. I was just wondering if there have been cases yet where financial institutions have refused to reimburse customers claiming that the customers were negligent?

 

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/8915217/n...curity/t/know-your-rights-bank-account-fraud/

 

Thanks, that was an eye-opening article. What I meant more specifically though is, to date, have financial institutions denied reimbursement to customers who were defrauded online due to having infected computers and who also had Rapport installed? I believe the scenario you proposed was that banks would have the right to deny reimbursement if a customer had Rapport installed and had been warned by Rapport that the computer was infected - is that correct?

 

From the Fidelity Investment web site: https://pcs.fidelity.com/public/content/Shared/Security/ProtectionGuarantee

The above is from the "fine print" section.

Pay close attention to what is highlighted in bold. Unsecured computers have been found in court cases to be those posessing inadequate security controls or those that have been infected with malware that an "average user" should have been aware of. How would this be determined. Courts have ruled that such PC be examined by defendant's forensic experts and any other relevant activity logs and the like provided by the defendant.

 

No. What I am saying it is possible.

Yes. I would say that the bank could claim you were negligent. Your defense would be you were using bank recommended software. It would all depend on what transpired after the malware was discovered. Did the bank properly inform you that you were infected and did you ignore those warnings?

In any case like I said previously, you may get you money back but it will cost you in legal fees.

 

It's clear that not using security software could be a basis for liability, but how would using Rapport be a basis for liability? I believe Rapport claims to keep transactions safe even if there is malware on the system.

Edit: Just read your earlier response so you can ignore this.

 

Btw, I´ve done some reading, and there seem to be two big competitors, namely ThreatMetrix and Quarri. They seem to work about the same as Trusteer.

http://www.threatmetrix.com/technology/
http://www.threatmetrix.com/docs/ThreatMetrix-TrustDefender-Client.pdf

https://www.quarri.com/products/protect_on_q/poq-features
https://www.quarri.com/products/protect_on_q/specifications

 

Well, the first fails miserably at MRG tests while the second looks good but it's not free. Unless it offers more features I don't see it as attractive as the free Trusteer ;-)

 

MyPOQ is free ; https://www.quarri.com/products/mypoq/overview

Been running it for awhile now; a bit slow on startup but otherwise........

 

Uuhm, then why they say free 30 days evaluation?
I guess they should fix their web site...

 

Maybe they are thinking of charging in the future?

But I agree the web-site is confusing.

 

I think presently all you have to do is register with Quarri to use mypoq. Also on the features web page they show two types of protection; anti-malware and data leak protection. I believe the latter would not be a free protect.

One thing about Quarri is it is a U.S. company based in Austin, TX. All the other safe banking software are developed by foreign companies. That includes Trusteer which is Israeli based.

 

For me Quarri and you are foreigners too. Internet is not the USA, you know.

 

Internet has nothing to do with this discussion. Legal jurisdiction does.

 

Headquarters of Trusteer are in Boston, Massachusetts, USA. SunTrust, First Republic Bank, Bank of America are only few of US banks offering Trusteer Rapport to their customers. The argument you are rising doesn't really stand very solidly.. to say the least. LoL

 

Anti-Malware, High Integrity and DLP are all free

 

No, Trusteer is an Israeli company:http://israel21c.org/news/ibm-acquires-israels-trusteer/. It does has a U.S. subsidary in Boston I beleive to assist its marketing efforts to its primary U.S. banking customer base. I believe all software development is done in Israel.

 

Headquarters and main development staff is in US. So, fully liable to US law.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusteer
http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapId=49758052

 

I guess you didn't access the link I posted?

@isael21c.org

 

Come on... Can you at least read EN. Your statement about legal jurisdiction is non sense. Rapport is US based! And articles about the merge is useless to prove the contrary. They talk about something specific, the creation of a Unit in Israel. No discussion about where Rapport is actually registered and where the headquarters are. According to you as soon as someone has offices in Israel it become automatically from Israel?

Its not the first time that you try to discredit IT companies. Not sure what is your hidden agenda but anyway its not very professional.