Posts by wisewellies 4 publicly visible posts • joined 16 Sep 2014
This problem could easily be solved once and for all if BT took the initiative. Since they already have the mechanism in place to identify these calls (and hence must know where they're coming from), could they not add a flag to their CallerID implementation to indicate that the call may be from a suspect source? It would be trivial to integrate this into (for instance) an Asterisk dialplan so that businesses (and advanced home users) can make use of this service too
The true aim of chip cards was to move the liability for fraudulent transactions away from the banks, and place it squarely into the hands of the user. Chip (+PIN in most sensible places) was deemed to be so secure, that the only way a fraudulent transaction could take place is if you had physical access to the card and the PIN. Since introduction, there have been several methods demonstrated that allow fraudulent transactions - yet the banks refuse to publicly acknowledge that they are anything other than the customer's fault.
These so-called 'smart' meters are not going to be installed by qualified electricians - they are far too expensive. Instead the plan calls for an army of hastily-recruited PFYs with a couple of hours training. This might be OK for accessible meter locations, but a sizeable number of meters are fitted in dark, semi-inaccessible places, or with questionable wiring. Is a short training course really sufficient to equip these people with the skills necessary to identify a dangerous installation?
In my own case, an SSE meter change technician wrenched the meter tails around quite a bit when he changed the meter - yet only checked the meter end of the connection for tightness. He didn't check the fusebox end. I returned to my house after a trip abroad to find a strong smell of burning, and a partially melted fusebox. This 'smart' meter programme can and will lead to house fires.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
