3 ms·
I would avoid dealing with any company that did this sort of thing, even if they offered me a way to opt out of it. In order to play "we were lying to you for a
by justin66 3y ago
I would avoid dealing with any company that did this sort of thing, even if they offered me a way to opt out of it. In order to play "we were lying to you for a good reason! isn't this fun!" games with their customers, a company needs to cross the "we lied to you" line, and that is something they should not do with their customers.
(my employer runs these sorts of tests and I'm fine with it, the expectations in that relationship are quite different)
- pmontra 3y agoA bank could add security drills into the contract with the customer. It's a kind of training so it could also get some good press. Add some credits (maybe real money) if a customer reports correctly the phishing to the bank instead of ignoring it or falling for it? The downside could be a lot of pressure on the security related part of customer service so they should plan to get only a few reports per day.
- justin66 3y agoYour post is a series of bad ideas but it did remind me of something: every interaction with the customer through customer service costs a bank something like ten or fifteen bucks (I'm sure that figure is out of date), and God forbid if they actually take a staff member's time at a bank branch. For that reason alone pretty much everything we're talking about here is a no go. Every "what the fuck is this shit?" question the bank gets about phishing, or - to the point of your post - every "where's the bonus I was supposed to get for correctly flagging your shit?" question the bank has to respond to, would cost them real money.