URGENT, Secure Device Required for TWS

[jimrockford]

Quote from Bell:

Thank you. Looked through Etrade press releases on their web site for period Sep 2006 - May 2007. Nothing found.

I said there was single documented case. I was wrong. There are 2 (two) SEC publications concerning two separate price manipulations combined with presumable account hacking:

http://sec.gov/news/press/2006/2006-212.htm and
http://sec.gov/news/press/2007/2007-33.htm

It is good. Will you accept responsibility for unauthorized access by excluding from Customer Agreement cited above disclamer?

Bell,

It is unreasonable for you to expect E-trade to serve you, on a silver platter, the info you seek about a very extensive pattern of problems at many brokers, especially E-trade. You need to make a little effort to find the information from other sources, especially when it is info E-Trade doesn't want you to find. You need to learn how to use Google. You need to learn this, in order to protect yourself as a trader and retail brokerage customer.

The problem of hacking and theft of retail brokerage accounts has been very extensive, and is not confined to just a couple of cases. Do more research, and you will find that there are far more cases, as part of a very extensive pattern.

It is not reasonable for you to expect IB to provide you with links to specific cases. You should thank IBj for bringing the problem to your attention, and then do your own homework by finding links to specific cases on your own.

I think IB is doing a good job of addressing this issue, and of responding to customer concerns and making adjustments and improvements to its security plans, and I think IBj is doing a good job of explaining and defending IB's policies. Thank you, IBj.

 

[GTS]

Quote from rayl:

I think what I read is that IB will be more accomodating if the security device is in place, but it is still discretionary.

So I don't see the cause of the grievance -- if you think it's nonsense... and correctly observe that the minimal requirement in the agreement is no make-whole arrangement... then just opt out. Status quo ante.

I've already stated that even with warranties, they are subject to interpretation, dispute arbitration, etc. (time value lost), I would still prefer the security device. But not everyone has to agree with me.

I think you are far too kind in your interpretation...this is how I read it:

If you opt-out, you are are on your own if something happens (they may help you figure out what happened but no restitution)

If you use the device (opt-in), then you are still held to the same policy there was before they implemented the device: their discretion on what they do (if anything) to make you whole.

It would be one thing is if they gave guaranteed fraud protection for customers that use the device but they clearly are not offering that.

 

[rayl]

Quote from GTS:

I think you are far too kind in your interpretation...this is how I read it:

If you opt-out, you are are on your own if something happens (they may help you figure out what happened but no restitution)

If you use the device (opt-in), then you are still held to the same policy there was before they implemented the device: their discretion on what they do (if anything) to make you whole.

It would be one thing is if they gave guaranteed fraud protection for customers that use the device but they clearly are not offering that.

But that's true pre-device. So if you opt out, it is status quo ante.

 

[GTS]

Quote from rayl:

But that's true pre-device. So if you opt out, it is status quo ante.

No pre-device it was discretionary how they handled fraud, post-device if you opt out you are definitely screwed, if you opt-in then it is still discretationary (status quo)

 

[rayl]

Quote from GTS:

No pre-device it was discretionary how they handled fraud, post-device if you opt out you are definitely screwed, if you opt-in then it is still discretationary (status quo)

Fair enough. But I'd counter that as it is discretionary, it's discretionary how the discretion is applied. The discretion now is, "we don't even want to bother investigating, etc., if you're not willing to use the security device."

 

[Bell]

Quote from jimrockford:

It is not reasonable for you to expect IB to provide you with links to specific cases. You should thank IBj for bringing the problem to your attention, and then do your own homework by finding links to specific cases on your own.

Wrong, I shouldn't thank anyone for referral to Google Google isn't a smart answer and means we are talking about rumors. The problem, if such exist, is factually addressed on official web sites like SEC, openly, without allusions, like adults do.

 

[rayl]

A general article:

http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=printArticleBasic&articleId=9004416


A speech by the Chief Counsel, Office of Compliance Inspections & Examinations, SEC -- c.f., variation 3 (and on withdrawals, variation 2):

http://www.sec.gov/news/speech/2006/spch100506jhw.htm


An explicit SEC litigation action (though this is a straight forward identity theft vs. an account or trading takeover, the same fraud can be committed w/an account or trading takeover):

http://www.sec.gov/litigation/litreleases/2007/lr20098.htm

 

[chs245]

Quote from IB Salvatore:

SSB,

The overnight restart would cause a new STP authentication. This is the only time IB forces you to log out and soon will be the only time a new STP authentication is required.

Sal

Hi Salvatore

is the timing of the overnight restart the same in all countries where IB is active ? Is it each day at 12:00:00 am EST ?
If so, that would be in the middle of the ASIA PAcific trading day - or is there a way to customize the timing ?

Oliver

 

[walterjennings]

Quote from chs245:

Hi Salvatore

is the timing of the overnight restart the same in all countries where IB is active ? Is it each day at 12:00:00 am EST ?
If so, that would be in the middle of the ASIA PAcific trading day - or is there a way to customize the timing ?

Oliver

agreed. it would be nice if IB could synced their restart time with the restart times of the servers on the electric exchanges, shortly after 4pm est before 5 i assume? i personally miss a lot of volume between 12 midnight and 12:30 when the feeds start working consistently again.

also IB should consider taking some of the profits they get from the interest on the first 10k of each client accounts and buying some hotswapable servers. in this day of possible redundancy there is no reason to have ANY downtime, much less daily down time.

your post might warrant a new thread since restart times dont really have much to do with the secure device program.