On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 1:32 PM, SIP <s...@arcdiv.com> wrote: > As an end-point ITSP, I can assure you, it would be us who's assessed > the requisite charges. If someone uses a fraudulent card, we're required > to pay. If someone uses a three letter password on his account, and it's > hacked into and uses to rack up charges, we have to pay.
Neil, It hadn't occurred to me when writing it, but obviously there are situations that don't match the banking paradigm. For example, suppose I run my own asterisk, I have a contract with a company like yours and you have my banking info with an authorization to top up. If the fraud is someone on the banking end (hacked my card details for example) that's covered by the bank. But if they brute force hacked my asterisk install because the extension, the username and the secret are all '2005' and then make $100k worth of calls, people like lawyers and judges won't easily see that it's the asterisk install that's responsible, not your company or even the bank. I wonder what steps can be taken legally right now to make responsibilities clearer to the legal world? I once had a guy break in to my house and call his girlfriend in Mexico about 50 times in two weeks. When I called Pacific Bell, the operator placed a call to the number, the woman (stupidly!) admitted, "yes I know Luis, he calls me all the time" and even though the operator heard this, PB still refused to exempt those charges and go after the guy. I closed my PB account and opened a new one under a variation of my name. /r _______________________________________________ -- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com -- asterisk-users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users