On Tue, 16 Jul 2024 00:02:26 +0100, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk>
wrote:

>Tweed wrote:
>
>> It’s usually a sim swap fraud. Somehow convince the mobile operator to port
>> the number to another mobile operator where the new sim is in the
>> possession of the fraudster.
>
>Whenever I've requested porting my number to a different operator, I've
>received texts giving 24 or more hours notice to port.
>
>Which operators *don't* operate such a safeguard?

The fraudsters phone pretending to be the operator, to say that they
have had a SIM-swap request.

--
Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
Web: http://www.khanya.org.za/stevesig.htm
Blog: http://khanya.wordpress.com
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk

Steve Hayes wrote:

> Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:
>
>> Which operators *don't* operate such a safeguard?>
> The fraudsters phone pretending to be the operator, to say that they
> have had a SIM-swap request.
> The fraudsters phone pretending to be the operator, to say that they
> have had a SIM-swap request.

Still, why no confirmation from the end-user, seems negligent of the
operator, they know email and/or postal addr for user to send bills to ...

p.s. I don't mind receiving cc: by email from usenet posters, but doing
so from a non-functioning email addr seems a little rude?

On Mon, 15 Jul 2024 14:48:38 +0100, Clive Page <usenet@page2.eu>
wrote:
>
>I have no idea why the banks have recently made the security of their apps weaker. I have two banking apps on my phone, each of them used to have a longish alphanumeric password that I had chosen (two different passwords of course). But recent compulsory "upgrades" to each App have made me chose a 5-digit or 6-digit PIN. I have chosen different PINs and neither is the same as the one I use to unlock the phone, but all the same it's obviously less secure than before. Can anyone think why on earth they have done that? It seems crazy to me.

If people are required to use complex passwords it's unlikely they'll
be able to memorize them, so will often write them down. People are
much more likely to be able to memorize a 6-digit password.

So the reduced security of a simple password is more than outweighed
by the risk of people writing a password down.

Chris

On 16/07/2024 13:32, Chris in Makati wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Jul 2024 14:48:38 +0100, Clive Page <usenet@page2.eu>
> wrote:
>>
>> I have no idea why the banks have recently made the security of their apps weaker. I have two banking apps on my phone, each of them used to have a longish alphanumeric password that I had chosen (two different passwords of course). But recent compulsory "upgrades" to each App have made me chose a 5-digit or 6-digit PIN. I have chosen different PINs and neither is the same as the one I use to unlock the phone, but all the same it's obviously less secure than before. Can anyone think why on earth they have done that? It seems crazy to me.
>
> If people are required to use complex passwords it's unlikely they'll
> be able to memorize them, so will often write them down. People are
> much more likely to be able to memorize a 6-digit password.
>
> So the reduced security of a simple password is more than outweighed
> by the risk of people writing a password down.
>
> Chris
Well that is possible, but I have no idea if it is true. But in that case, people like me who can memorize a few alphanumeric passwords should not be forced to switch instead to a set of 5-digit or 6-digit numbers instead. I think I'd like the choice of weaker or stronger security. YMMV.

--
Clive Page