[6293] in cryptography@c2.net mail archive
Re: Debit card fraud in Canada
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (David Honig)
Fri Dec 24 15:43:32 1999
Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.19991224115829.00802c40@pop.sprynet.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Dec 1999 11:58:29 -0800
To: M Taylor <mctylr@privacy.nb.ca>, cryptography@c2.net
From: David Honig <honig@sprynet.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.10.9912232140450.2452-100000@zut.home>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
At 01:28 PM 12/24/99 -0400, M Taylor wrote:
>> I personally would like a clearer explanation of just what happened, and
what
>> the "tamper-proof" devices were.
Anyone who uses 'tamper proof' is basically a novice.
Or a marketing droid. Tamper resistance increases the
cost of attack; tamper-evident packaging increases
the probability of detection.
In the rabbit-fox game, foxes never go extinct, and rabbits
are never safe.
>One of the largest security measures used seems to be that Interac (the
>debit network company, www.interac.org) tried to control access of
>Interact terminals to legimate companies.
Shades of DVD, GSM, ad nauseum.
