IB Secure Device

Quote from HoundDogOne:

Thank you for a detailed explanation...
Though your conclusions are obvious to any software engineer...
And, most certainly, to IB's engineers.

But everyone misses the point.

IB makes money by offloading endless services onto the Customer...
Who then bear the cost instead of IB.

That's how the managers at IB think...
What other costs can we transfer to the Customer?

The "security device" simply transfers most of the ** risk of online fraud ** to the Customer...
Because IB can easily make the False Claim that the "security device" is foolproof...
And the Customer MUST be at fault... MUST be negligence or inside job.

Try explaining the content of your post to a 70 year old Connecticut judge.

IB's approach also fails the laugh test.

People do not put 5 locks on their door...
They put one good lock... plus get insurance...
Because all security devices have major limitations.

Unlike E*Trade that simply says "Dont worry... you are insured"...
IB rejects insurance...
And then tries to force you to put "5 locks on your door".

The whole IB security situation is scary as hell.
More...

It seems to me that no broker, IB or anyone else, would be responsible for security problems beyond their own system. Why would they? Maybe that's not your point. Maybe what you're trying to say is that even with this security device someone can hack into my account, due to a failure in IB's system. I don't believe that. But I'm open to an explanation of how that would take place. Do you have one?

OldTrader
 
Quote from AAA30:
... a possible solution for them would be for IB create a page where they could l authorize a List of securities that can be traded in the account. Or provide limits based on market cap, price, average daily dollar volume, percent of account per position, or other variables. It could be set up in the account management section that could only be accessed with the key fob/ security device most already have...
More...
I like this idea, so I submitted an request for enhancement. The filtering need not be complex (e.g. no penny stocks, no thin markets, etc) and could apply to only opening transactions.
 
Quote from HoundDogOne:

SIPC only protects against a broker-dealer going bankrupt...
It does not cover online fraud within a specific broker-dealer.

And BD bankrupcies are very rare... less than 10/year out of 5,000 American BDs.

If IB's accounts are insured for online fraud...
Can a representative from IB please post a link to an IB web page explaining the insurance in detail?

If not... shame.
More...


Does e-trade use some insurance specifically for online fraud?
 
Here's an idea:

Make it so if you have long term positions, you can "lock" those positions.

You have to enter in the RSA passcode on a different screen to "unlock" the positions, so even if someone hacks into your machine, and gets into TWS (which i'm assuming you'll need the RSA passcode to get into TWS), your blue chips are still protected.
 
Quote from rwk:

I like this idea, so I submitted an request for enhancement. The filtering need not be complex (e.g. no penny stocks, no thin markets, etc) and could apply to only opening transactions.
More...

did you submit as a feature poll entry? if so, please give your submission user ID, so all of us in favor can vote for it.
 
Heres a filtering idea.

Security key for money transfer.
Log on without security key.

But.

To trade anything you haven't been trading in the last 30 days requires the security key (it could be 7 days or 90 days).

So the security key is for changes of easily measurable behaviour.

Can IB please give us an idea how hard/easy the various filtering ideas would be to implement to assist in picking/voting?
 
Shall we step back to square one to get a sense of risk?

What is the likelihood or probability that a new PC with XP or Vista (plus most up to date SP), with just trading apps downloaded from IB or other well-known brokers installed, will be hacked or hijacked? That PC is on DSL or cable broadband, with no firewall and no virus scan, dedicated to trading only?

The reason I ask is, all the horror stories we hear have trojan or virus as common elements. If you do not use your trading PC for surfing or e-mail, how much risk is it exposed to?
 
Quote from kiwi_trader:

Heres a filtering idea.

Security key for money transfer.
Log on without security key.

But.

To trade anything you haven't been trading in the last 30 days requires the security key (it could be 7 days or 90 days).

So the security key is for changes of easily measurable behaviour.

Can IB please give us an idea how hard/easy the various filtering ideas would be to implement to assist in picking/voting?
More...

This sounds like a great idea.
 
I'm very happy to see that IB will be offering this to all clients. I am not currently an IB customer, but your firm is certainly one that I am interested in opening an account with in the future.

I must admit that I am quite suprised by the quantity of complaints on this thread. I would guess that many of those complaining have never used one of these authentication fobs before. I have previously used this type of device for corporate purposes, and they tend to be very simple, easy to use, and typically only add a few seconds to a login procedure.

I would rather have an extra layer of security than save a few seconds at time of login, particularly when it comes to protecting my money.
 
Quote from HoundDogOne:

Thank you for a detailed explanation...
Though your conclusions are obvious to any software engineer...
And, most certainly, to IB's engineers.

But everyone misses the point.

IB makes money by offloading endless services onto the Customer...
Who then bear the cost instead of IB.

That's how the managers at IB think...
What other costs can we transfer to the Customer?

The "security device" simply transfers most of the ** risk of online fraud ** to the Customer...
Because IB can easily make the False Claim that the "security device" is foolproof...
And the Customer MUST be at fault... MUST be negligence or inside job.

Try explaining the content of your post to a 70 year old Connecticut judge.

IB's approach also fails the laugh test.

People do not put 5 locks on their door...
They put one good lock... plus get insurance...
Because all security devices have major limitations.

Unlike E*Trade that simply says "Dont worry... you are insured"...
IB rejects insurance...
And then tries to force you to put "5 locks on your door".

The whole IB security situation is scary as hell.
More...

I think you are right.

The only solution which would protect IB customers would be the ‘Complete Fraud Protection’ as E-Trade has already introduced.

I’m a IB customer since 2002 and I would expect from the leading firm to provide the optimum solution. Otherwise….
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top