Group Assignment 2 - Article Form

Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 3

Group Assignment 2:

The $100,000 Keying Error


Article Form
THE A-TEAM
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]


DATE: 20 SEPTEMBER 2013
BIBLIOGRAPHIC CITATION FOR ARTICLE:
Olsen, Kai A. (2008, April). The $100,000 Keying Error. IEEE Pervasive Computing, 106-108.
SOURCE 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).
BRIEF 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 didnt 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.

OUR OPINION:
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.

You might also like