Safety On The World Wide Web

Reading about the $90,000 heist.
Seems to me these learned people didn't read the original info release on that event. If I can recall, it was a transaction by a family owned small company in Florida. Their information had been either highjacked or "phished" and some malcontent simply pulled a transfer. Since the transfer went to a foreign country ( smart, because of people on the job or sleeping would not have been available to oversee the electronic event first hand,) the recipient had plenty of time to ping around and do his dirt.
The account owner, as many of us, may not have suspected anything going on and may not have even had a chance to verify a transaction had taken place. No reason as perhaps he/she did not initiate a transaction and no urgency to check his account every 5 minutes. Now, consider some of the information. This was a re-direct action, outside of the control of the bank from what I understand. Even the bank safeguards were in place and all appears proper. No need to red flag the action or the account. It seems to me the bank BoA (Bank of America) is going beyond the line to support their client.
Where the problem exists is as follows:
1. It is a given that there are devious people out there.
2. It is a given that the transaction took place "Out Of Hand" meaning it flew through the air via transmission and hardware.
3. It is known that this industry of on line banking is subject to attempts to infiltrate, modify, manipulate, "crack" and any other unthought of means of viewing.
And those are just starters for concern.
Now consider this:
Filters, anti-virus programs, anti-spam, firewalls, all are written programs done so as a product of an event. Hence, timing is an important factor. Communications and standards governed by laws of different countries and privacy issue confound the situation. We all are an infant in cyber world data sharing subject only to new unthought of events and the corrections or responses to such. And The very banks and businesses that promote the use of electronic use to access accounts and or transactions, leads the client to a false sense of "secured" business actions. So, yes, the banks share in some responsibility. The client who wants to use the programs and devices, steps out on thin ice but in many cases, lends his/her trust to those making such services available. Most people using such business on-line devices haven't the slightest idea of what is behind it all. They purchase a computer, decide to enter a new field of activity on it, have a "computer guru" come in and set it up to perform a certain function and then believe all is well. And, most of this  "use" is governed by PRICE. No question about it. The availability to use on-line services is tremendous, saves paperwork, man-hours, postage, time and is quickly available for retrieval. Many good points. Now to correct the evils. How to do? For me, I use only one to pay my telephone bill and or to verify the calls made. Frightening: About 2 weeks ago I sat with my "friendly banker person".  I asked specific safeguard questions and surprisingly, received vague  if not "no" information on verifying any potential illegal transaction events. There were no safeguards she could define, that were in place.  I want to feel comfortable that she was simply not trained in the area of my questions. I cut my conversation short and excused myself  after that. My mind made up that "there will be no electronic banking"

originating from me.As for the $90,000 stolen from those folks, for what ever reason they lost, I feel sad for them. Be it ignorance, laziness or whatever, I have a feeling, a gut feeling, THEY TRUSTED and lost.

As for the thieves, castration and blindness would be in order for their wrongdoings. Now for the Governments to correct such events.

RoBo