When it comes to credit card security, apparently less is now more

MBNA, my credit card issuer, has sent me an email saying it's dropping the MasterCard SecureCode 3D Secure scheme. This is the security procedure that asks me to enter a password when shopping online.

It says "Using your card online is now easier and more secure", adding that "All online payments will be authorised instantly, whilst still providing all the security features you have come to expect from us."

Which is odd because the card issuer originally said 3D Secure offered added protection.

So... offering the service increased the amount of protection I had... and then taking it away gave me even more protection.




PS: "Servcies"? I'd like to think my financial services providers didn't make too many mistakes.

Copywriters are frauds

Sometimes I feel that I’m more a forger than a copywriter.

I meet a client and write in their voice. I adopt their style. I praise their products like an employee.

They’re writing songs. I’m writing a pastiche. It's an analogy I rather like.

Thanks for visiting our online shop, please don't come back

I've done a spot of online shopping this morning. I bought a collection of cables & leads to connect my computer to my TV. It was all pretty straightforward; I found what I wanted in the online shop, added the item to my 'basket' and paid by using Google Checkout.

Got an email receipt from Google and another from the retailer. All's well.

Half-an-hour later I get a second email from the retailer.

"Thank you for stopping by", it says "We noticed that during your visit to our site you placed the following item(s) in your shopping cart, but did not complete the transaction."

It then describes the item I've just bought.

Oh. Perhaps the purchase didn't work. But hang on, I've got a receipt for my payment via Google. Perhaps there's a problem with the online shop.

There's a "Recover Your Basket" link in the email. Maybe I should click that.

"We are always interested in knowing what reason made you decide not to purchase at this time. If you could be so kind as to let us know if you had any issues or concerns, we would appreciate it. We are asking for feedback from you and others as to how we can make your experience better."

That's nice. But what about those cables and leads I've ordered?

"If the price was an issue, we can provide you with 5% off this purchase with us, if you come back today!"

You WHAT? I've already paid for the goods, you're telling me you've already mislaid my order and now you want to give me a discount.

"PLEASE NOTE: If you selected either PayPal or Google Checkout as a payment option, or purchased from our Ebay Store then please just ignore this email!"

Oh, that's alright then. I'll ignore the discount I could have had if I'd prevaricated. I'll ignore your poor attempt at customer service. That jolly exclamation mark makes it all okay. Thank you. I won't be back.

Super injunctions? Take a tip from the mobile industry

This morning I walked past the rack of newspapers in my local shop. Alongside the shocking news that the Duchess of Cambridge actually buys food - don’t get me started! - were headlines about Gabby Logan. The TV presenter was denying she’d had an affair with Alan Shearer, which many people had previously suggested was concealed by a so-called super injunction.

“What does this have to do with mobile phones?”, I hear you ask. Not much, to be honest. But it reminded me of a telecoms news story from November 2009.

Back then, the Information Commissioner’s Office announced it had “been working with a mobile telephone company” after the firm appeared to have discovered a number of employees selling information about customers’ mobile phone contracts.

It didn’t reveal which company it had been talking to… but after Vodafone, O2, Orange and Three had all issued denials, T-Mobile eventually confirmed it was the network involved.

And that got me thinking.

Gabby’s set the ball rolling. All we need is a few more denials to help narrow down the super-injunctees. Assuming, of course, anyone really cares who they are.

Okay, I’ll get back to work now. Hang on… she put WHAT in her shopping trolley?

The Lambretta Egg

I spotted this in someone else's magazine: it's a Lambretta collectable egg. Appropriate for Easter, n'est-ce pas?

This gewgaw is styled after the Lambretta SX200, a motor scooter of the 1960s. And now The Bradford Exchange has apparently combined "the legendary artistry of Peter Carl Fabergé" with Lambretta's 200cc scooter.

"At the flick of a switch you can hear the authentic sound of SX200's iconic engine", says the advertising message. Surely that's the sound of Mr Faberge spinning in his grave?

Less of a Faberge egg, more of a curate's egg.

Spammy spammy spam spam spam

The latest piece of nonsense to hit my email in-box claims to be a response to the "collection of resources" on TheFonecast.com. It's asking me to link to an article about PowerPoint on someone else's website. Now, I'm not going to argue that there's many a fine resource at The Fonecast, mainly because I wrote many of them myself, but I fear there's been a spot of cutting-and-pasting going on.

Google the phrase "I really appreciate your collection of resources on the..." and I found loads of very similar messages about a wide cross-section of sites. Along with "I know this article would be a great addition to your information".

What's particularly curious about today's message is that the sender went to the trouble of finding my personal email address and using my name (which isn't part of that email address).

It follows a message on Tuesday from someone who wrote "it's always a great pleasure to read your articles and I have subsequently become a loyal reader". I'm not the first person to receive this type of message... but, again, there was an element of targeting.

Which, all things considered, I find slightly depressing.

According to our experts...

One of this morning's news headlines is a report from Billmonitor that claims the UK's mobile phone users are spending almost £5 million per year more than they need. Billmonitor is a mobile tariff price comparison site that's been approved by Ofcom, which helps them stand out from the crowd. However, what's also being mentioned in reports is that the company was "invented by mathematicians in Oxford". (For example, the BBC refers to "a group of Oxford mathematicians behind a start-up firm called Billmonitor"). Whilst the company is indeed based in Oxford - and I don't doubt the involvement of mathematicians - I can't help but notice how the public positioning of Billmonitor differs from that of other comparison websites. I doubt that similar figures would have been given as much credence if they'd been presented by Gio Gompario, Aleksandr Orlov or even Omid Djalili.