I didn't find Adam or Terrence to be particularly critical of Stars, it was an interesting back and forth conversation , usually I would skip over this segment being in the USA , but I found this one to be very informative.

I got the impression that Steve D was suggesting that the Stars PIN would have prevented just about all the hacks that we've been hearing about . If that is true why don't they make it mandatory that players use the PIN when logging in.

Adam maybe insure your car under your wife's name. That way when cops run automatic scanner it'll show up under her and hopefully won't red flag you, unless she has bunch tickets as well.

Oh look MORE MONIES from Mr Boston!

Michigan St covers (with a good sweat for a bonus) for the win.

Go Boston !

Just need Kentucky not to win the whole thing now


Sent from my Nexus 10 using 2+2 Forums

Boston interview is higlight of year. But this year it was ridiculous how right he has been

great episode

Jason Koon said he'd be posting a thread with some recipes on here. Was highly interested in that. Please link me to that if it's available yet. Thanks!

Also what can I order from the cocktail waitress during the a game if I did not bring anything with me to keep my blood sugar at a decent rate (not to spike it).

How about a coffee with splenda/stevia and half and half? That has a good amount of fat
and a little caffine boost. I usually order tomato juice with a few olives if I start to feel fatigued or hungry. What other choices do you guys think are good?

Caj

thanks boston for the free money !!

Haters? 31 going on 17?

Finally got to watch a game this year. Michigan/Louisville made for a great afternoon. Sad I won't get to see the Colonel Sanders suit.

+1

Looking forward to this, hopefully he has time to do it.

Did anyone else get TChan's "start driving faster" to Tuchman? Laughed out loud!!!!

I was going to protest that "haters" is probably played out for 17 year olds, but Taylor Swift is using it so....

Oh, and "played out" is another colloquialism that I am probably not allowed to use. FYI: it connotes triteness.

Roscoe updates are so brutal.

Ugh not a fan of how Steve came across in his segment. "I'm not trying to be defensive..." Is equivalent to "I mean no offense but..."

He keeps referencing two things that bother me; the low low low number of times these situations occur and that it is happening through no fault of their own.

Great so the number is low, congratulations, but that isn't good enough. It can always be lower and you should only be making that point. "We are doing everything we can to completely eliminate fraud no matter how unrealistic that might be." Is a much better angle to take then to keep reiterating how small this fraud is. That doesn't do ANYTHING for the friends and families and thread readers who find out about these situations. Personally, I find it insulting.

Steve mentions several times that this fraud happened through no fault of their own,but they are working hard on improving their security parameters. But I thought it was through no fault of your own?

To be fair I'm a cynic but every point Steve made was about saving the company money and not putting checks in place - like the credit card checkbox - because derp derp people are dumb and can't be trusted and long term more people will be angry about not being able to play because of some thing they didn't know they were doing. That's bs to me. They are choosing money over integrity imo.

Yeah, I didn't like that, either.

I would be glad to have a "designated credit card" mechanism backfire against me.

e.g. I select a card with which to deposit. Years later, I forget I had done it and attempt to use a different card (which is weird, because I've never made more than one deposit on a given site). Would I be mad about this? Maybe temporarily inconvenienced, but not at all mad. If it means having to contact Stars support and jump a few hurdles to add a new card, so be it. I'd be glad someone was looking out for it.

I've been dealing with some identity-theft issues recently, and had a conversation with my investigating police officer about this type of thing. My question was why retail outlets never seem to care about matching the name on the card with the person holding it. Her answer was similar to Steve's: it seems like stores weigh the risk between those rare times a card is used fraudulently vs. the many, many times the customer would be inconvenienced (e.g. having to show ID, not being able to let a family member use your card).

She's probably correct, but why can't the customer determine that risk? What if I don't mind the inconvenience? I would not mind at all having a security option on my card that the store clerk asks for ID whenever it gets used. My wallet is already out, so it's no extra skin there. I WANT that clerk checking that it's me, because I know it's me.

Adam's ideas to Steve seemed just as reasonable. The types of people who would opt-in to, say, matching MAC addresses to their accounts are also the types who would know they're doing it.

And I still don't get how the PIN would have prevented all of this. If someone else could get your password, couldn't they also get your PIN through the same means?

A few weeks ago, I had an email come back to me when I opened Pokerstars on my other computer. It had been a while since I played on it, it's in the same house. I thought that was pretty good.

It read:

Tbf I worked retail back when checks were a popular thing and you'd be shocked the amount of morons that would take serious offense to asking for an ID. The irony is these same people would flip their lids if they ever found out you took a check from them that they didn't write. Can't have it both ways.

I'm 28 and always show my ID when buying alcohol and tobacco just to give everyone peace of mind. That kind of thing doesn't offend me in the least.

Write "Ask for ID" on the signature panel on the back of your cards.

Then consider how many times clerks actually look at a card anymore.

In a more general sense (not you in particular WT), its always amazed me how many people say "I wouldn't mind more security" in either a consumer sense or business sense. But as soon as a layer of security affects them for some reason they don't understand, its "Why is this so difficult" and the person complains to all who will listen and some who won't.

From a business perspective, I understand where Steve was coming from. Until proven otherwise, the accounts got cracked via an outside method. Those holding the accounts don't seem to have taken any of the options for added security offered by PS. I'm not saying they shouldn't increase security by default, but until more customers suffer or voice concerns, security will remain at the lowest common denominator for ease of use.

No comment on T's boner pun? I love you T. Hope Adam didn't reem you for the comment.

In fact, this was part of the conversation I had with the police officer. We both groused about how the clerk never actually sees the card anymore (unless it's a massive purchase). You swipe at the little machine. If the amount is greater than a certain threshold — e.g. $50 at my nearby supermarket — then I might have to sign something. But they don't exactly check that, either.

Hell, we in the U.S. are still using the old-school cards with the magnetic strip rather than the microchip-embedded ones. Sometimes I think I can hear Europeans laugh at us.

Edit: oops, meant to reply to this, too...

I'll admit I was one of those morons, as I was still a check-writer well into the 1990s. Wasn't offended per se, I just thought it was kind of a pain. Some places would require showing an ID (which I had) and a major credit card (which I didn't have). So either they wouldn't take my check, or they would have to call the bank or do some kind of background check. As such, I tended to carry a lot of cash, and only used a check for larger purchases. In fact, I still use cash for all purchases of less than $20, almost out of principle.

If I knew then what I know now, I would just have all three things on the counter every time I bought something.

1) I somewhat agree. When I opened a player's bank account at Commerce they gave the option to require a picture ID for all withdrawals, which I opted for. Seemed like a no-brainer to me, but I guess some people would see it as an inconvenience. But at least I had the choice.

2) Depends on how they obtained the password. If they got the password with a key logger, that doesn't work for the pin because you don't use a physical keyboard to input it. If they got it out of a passwords.txt file in the "PrivateDontRead" directory, then if you're foolish enough to keep an unencrypted file like that around, you're probably foolish enough to keep both your password and pin in there.

Good job on the security section. You were fair. No saliva on the big red spade.

One additional suggestion would be, that before my bank does a wire xfer they SMS a code number and I have put in that code number before the client will execute. As an additional layer of security each CPU has a unique ID it's possible to spoof it but you would have to know the victims CPU ID AND password. Technically a Trojan on the PC could get both.

I also think cash outs and deposits in the same day to different net teller accounts should raise flags.

Even the onscreen pin entries are not completely safe. Using screen grabbing software, checking the resolution of the screen, and tracking mouse movements they can be cracked about as easily as using a key logger.

The layout of the numbers is randomized for this reason.