Important! Security Issue, please read

[Parksy]

It's been brought to my attention recently that a long term forum member and Practical Caravan Magazine subscriber has been targeted by thieves in a potential telephone phishing scam.
It would appear that the scammers attempted to obtain bank account details from their intended victim during a telephone conversation in which they specifically mentioned the subscription payments to Practical Caravan whilst requesting more details.
The potential thieves were pretending that they worked for a well known High Street bank, but their target was highly suspicious and didn't reveal any of his banking details.
The thieves tried another tack by mentioning online banking and the names of other banks, perhaps hoping to get a reflex reply, so our forum member rang off and tried the 1471 service where, as expected, the callers number was withheld.

Our forum member and magazine subscriber has contacted the new management of Practical Caravan and after alleged denials that the leakage of sensitive information came from their system the intended victim pointed out that his home telephone number is ex-directory and the caller had specifically mentioned the Practical Caravan Magazine subscription.
The company representative reportedly checked our informant's sub history and found that the telephone number was present and that the security preferences were all set to 'Allow'. The settings were immediately changed to 'Deny' and the telephone number removed.

The advice to subscribers is-

• Remove your phone number from your profile
• Go to the blue Privacy Settings tab at the bottom right of the webpage
• Click on 'Reject All'
• Scroll to the bottom of the Settings box
• Click on 'Save and Exit'

 

[Grey13]

Rule of thumb:

Treat every call (especially unsolicited calls) as a scam:
No financial institution will ever ask for bank details over the phone.
Reject out of hand all unsolicited calls. (and emails)
Do not talk to them, they are skilled at tricking you into divulging info.
If in doubt, hang up and contact the supposed company using your own sourced information and numbers, never ask them for their number.

I use a generic email address (gmaiil) for forum and other non essential purposes and never give my personal day to day email address openly to avoid scam tricksters.

 

[Anseo]

I am very pleased that the Privacy Settings tab gives an easy option to "Reject All".

I wish other sites were less obstructive in making our privacy choices more difficult.

But, and it is a big BUT, why should the default setting be set to "ALLOW"; Practical Caravan is closer than most to 'getting there' regarding user privacy ( I acknowledge and somewhat thank PC for that).

Go the rightful way PC, set an example to other web-sites, reverse the default, and ask us if we consent to our information being shared first (before being asked to reject).

If you tell us why we should benefit from sharing our personal info you may have a better uptake of acceptances, in all honesty I don't at this time see any advantages for us to share information.

Can PC persuade us otherwise? I am happy to listen if PC cares to tell me.

Going back to the beginning of my post, I reiterate, PC have a much more acceptable approach than most others to 'user privacy' not ideal, but thank you nonetheless.

Regards,
John

 

[Parksy]

I am very pleased that the Privacy Settings tab gives an easy option to "Reject All".

I wish other sites were less obstructive in making our privacy choices more difficult.

But, and it is a big BUT, why should the default setting be set to "ALLOW"; Practical Caravan is closer than most to 'getting there' regarding user privacy ( I acknowledge and somewhat thank PC for that).

Go the rightful way PC, set an example to other web-sites, reverse the default, and ask us if we consent to our information being shared first (before being asked to reject).

If you tell us why we should benefit from sharing our personal info you may have a better uptake of acceptances, in all honesty I don't at this time see any advantages for us to share information.

Can PC persuade us otherwise? I am happy to listen if PC cares to tell me.

Going back to the beginning of my post, I reiterate, PC have a much more acceptable approach than most others to 'user privacy' not ideal, but thank you nonetheless.

Regards,
John

I moved this post from New Members and added it to the above in order to avoid a plethora of posts dealing with internet forum security on various message boards.

 

[Anseo]

Parksy, you got in before me

Apologies, I did not mean to post my comment in this topic, 'our website' is where I intended it to be.

hmy:

Thank you,

John

 

[Parksy]

You're welcome John

 

[ProfJohnL]

I was under the impression the law in the UK had changed and now the default should be "opt out", and user had to choose to "opt in"

 

[RayS]

Could be, Prof, but not sure that it is retrospective to previous 'permissions'.
I think this is perhaps why Steve has suggested everyone reviews their account.

 

[Parksy]

I was under the impression the law in the UK had changed and now the default should be "opt out", and user had to choose to "opt in"

From what I've read, the amended law is slightly unclear in that it stipulates that permissions (to use tracking data etc have to be obtained from users Prof.
I haven't seen anything which states exactly how these permissions have to be obtained, so I doubt if it matters much if the default is to allow with the clear option to withdraw permissions, as is the case with Practical Caravan website and forum or whether a website uses an opt in interface, either way the choice has been offered and permissions have been granted or denied by end users.
The point of my OP however is to alert forum users to the possibility that the data tracking currently in use on this website might have been compromised, and to point out how to tighten their security settings to avoid any possibility of them being defrauded.