<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Most internet retailers say cyber criminals are winning the war on web fraud</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.threatmetrix.com/fraudsandends/uncategorized/most-internet-retailers-say-cyber-criminals-are-winning-the-war-on-web-fraud/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.threatmetrix.com/fraudsandends/uncategorized/most-internet-retailers-say-cyber-criminals-are-winning-the-war-on-web-fraud/</link>
	<description>News &#38; Views on Fraud Prevention and Device ID</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Jul 2010 15:09:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Tom Grubb</title>
		<link>http://www.threatmetrix.com/fraudsandends/uncategorized/most-internet-retailers-say-cyber-criminals-are-winning-the-war-on-web-fraud/comment-page-1/#comment-493</link>
		<dc:creator>Tom Grubb</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Jun 2009 19:08:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.threatmetrix.com/blog/?p=53#comment-493</guid>
		<description>Thanks for your comment.  While we didn&#039;t capture any information about the survey respondents, I suspect you&#039;re right in suggesting that the awareness of device ID was/is probably higher among larger etailers.

The question of returning customer vs. fraudster was intended to stimulate some thought on the part of the person taking the survey to expand their view beyond just stopping fraud but also the value in having more information available earlier in an online transaction to build rapport with customers. One way ThreatMetrix helps here is giving customers the ability to maintain a local white list capability based on device identity that customers can (and do) use today for that purpose.

- Tom</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for your comment.  While we didn&#8217;t capture any information about the survey respondents, I suspect you&#8217;re right in suggesting that the awareness of device ID was/is probably higher among larger etailers.</p>
<p>The question of returning customer vs. fraudster was intended to stimulate some thought on the part of the person taking the survey to expand their view beyond just stopping fraud but also the value in having more information available earlier in an online transaction to build rapport with customers. One way ThreatMetrix helps here is giving customers the ability to maintain a local white list capability based on device identity that customers can (and do) use today for that purpose.</p>
<p>- Tom</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Coby</title>
		<link>http://www.threatmetrix.com/fraudsandends/uncategorized/most-internet-retailers-say-cyber-criminals-are-winning-the-war-on-web-fraud/comment-page-1/#comment-492</link>
		<dc:creator>Coby</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Jun 2009 18:28:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.threatmetrix.com/blog/?p=53#comment-492</guid>
		<description>Interesting survey. First chart is shocking with 50% saying they were not aware of it. Must be some pretty small shops. Whether its a returning customer or a fraudster is kind of a weak question however. That is a pretty broad question and Device ID would not be the best method for flagging return customers in the ecommerce world. Overall, good post!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting survey. First chart is shocking with 50% saying they were not aware of it. Must be some pretty small shops. Whether its a returning customer or a fraudster is kind of a weak question however. That is a pretty broad question and Device ID would not be the best method for flagging return customers in the ecommerce world. Overall, good post!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
