Even the MinPres isn’t immune against it.
Remember, a few weeks ago, a rumor about ATMs being hacked in Aruba was vehemently denied, yet a number of arrests were made in connection the following day.
Remember when the Arubus bank account was hacked and more than half a million florins syphoned out to Hong Kong. Most of the money was recovered then, with the help of the Interpol.
So, hacking is common, just ask any IT guy what a pain-in-the-you-know-what that is. And how much money is being spent on cyber security.
But from what I understand, the challenge here in Aruba is that we have no legislation regarding the bank’s responsibility towards clients, when a hacking incident is reported.
It is all covered by law in the Netherlands where banks are insured against fraud, but here?!
Logic says they must be, they must be insured against losses, yet in this case, CMB wouldn’t take responsibility for the stolen funds.
As you recall a couple from among my friends informed that their bank account was hacked and drained of nearly 44,000 florins! It was done by transfer, 7 different transactions over a period of one week. The money went to Mexico, California, Florida and Georgia (USA).
My shocked and dismayed friends discovered the hacking and called the bank.
That was in early August.
To date, the bank is shirking responsibility, it says it is collaborating, but in fact it did not provide the client and/or his lawyer with the IP address where the transfer were made from; it did not provide the client and/or his lawyer with a copy of the investigation file and it did not provide the client and/or his lawyer with the name of the insurance company where a claim could be filed.
My friends have been banking with the same establishment for 20 years and have NEVER sent money off island. This deviation from their normal spending pattern, did not raise a red flag.
And the bank charged all taxes and fees on the transactions, running the account into red.
The bank claims they are investigating, the Police is involved, lawyers speak to lawyers, they call it an isolated case, their banking system was not compromised, they say, and that the clients’ private and personal electronic signature was used to execute the transactions, thus “not my fault, not going to pay.”
The clients and their lawyer categorically deny that anyone had access to that private and personal electronic signature used in the hack. The numeric card was locked in a safe.
Bottomline, same as last time: Banks cannot wash their hands off and walk away in cases of hacking, they are responsible for the safety of our deposits, and that is why bank charges are so high, security, we have to pay for their firewalls and hack protection.
Silly questions: How did the hackers know how much money was available to syphon from the account?
