School Work

Group Assignment 2 - Article Form

Description
Tugas Komas
Categories
Published
of 3
All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.
Related Documents
Share
Transcript
  Group Assignment 2: The $100,000 Keying Error Article Form T HE A T EAM      Ahmad Kamal [0906563413]    Anandra A. Rinaldo Soroinda N. [0906510035]    Artanto Ishaam [0906518132]    Bona HCP Sidjabat [0906563590]    Febryan Rachim [0906629095]    Iqrar Mulfi [0906510262]    Septian Hadi Nugraha [0906629196]  D ATE :   20   S EPTEMBER 2013 B IBLIOGRAPHIC CITATION FOR ARTICLE : Olsen, Kai A. (2008, April). The $100,000 Keying Error. IEEE Pervasive Computing, 106-108. S OURCE OF ARTICLE : Olsen, Kai A. 2008. The $100,000 Keying Error . http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=4488265  (accessed: 19 September 2013). B RIEF SUMMARY OF ARTICLE : Grete Fossbakk used the internet banking facility from a Norwegian bank to transfer a large amount of money to her daughter. However, Fossbakk incorrectly entered the account number, which should 71581555022, became 715815555022 (excess 1 number). Because the internet banking system can only accept 11 digit account number, the account number that she filled in truncated and became 71581555502. Unfortunately, the wrong account number has an owner, but the owner didn’t report the incident, but instead gambled away much of the sum before police confiscated the remainder. Fossbakk took the case to the Norwegian Complaints Board for Consumers in Banking. This board deals with disputes between consumers and banks. The board has two representatives for the consumers and two from the banks, with a law professor as chair. Fossbakk demand compensation for the lost money entirely with the reason she did not receive an error message when entering an account number that excess digits, but the bank argues this case occurred because the mistakes Fossbakk not double check the designated account number. In a three-to-two vote, Fossbakkk lost. The chair voted for the bank, arguing that “she made an error and has to take responsibility.”    O UR O PINION : Grete Fossbak is not the only one wrong in this case. Many other stakeholders who are involved, such as the bank that released the internet banking with account number validation system that is still not functioning optimally, the developers who develop the bank's internet banking system, and the customer who receives the money Fossbakk misdirected. However, because the most highlighted in this case is Grete Fossbakk and the bank, then the opinion that we provide will be ranged on both parties. In our opinion, although Fossbakk made a potentially fatal mistake in this case, however, this incident also occurred due to accuracy of validation of account number is not yet optimal. Therefore, the bank, especially the internet banking system developers must be accountable for the performance of the system. They should make a system that has a better performance with minimum error rate, so that the case like this do not happen again. On the other hand, Fossbakk also not supposed to demand compensation for all the money lost, because he was not completely innocent in this case.
We Need Your Support
Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.

Thanks to everyone for your continued support.

No, Thanks