R. Kinney Williams & Associates
R. Kinney Williams
& Associates

Internet Banking News

January 6, 2002

FYI - Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons - Pursuant to Section 106 of the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001, the financial assets of Benevolence International Foundation, Inc. and Global Relief Foundation, Inc., wherever located, are blocked. Benevolence International Foundation, Inc. is known to have offices in Illinois and New Jersey, and Global Relief Foundation, Inc. is known to have offices in Illinois www.fdic.gov/news/news/financial/2002/fil0201.html 

FYI - Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons - On December 20, 2001, the Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) amended its listing of Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons by adding five new names of specially designated global terrorists. www.fdic.gov/news/news/financial/2002/fil0202.html 

FYI
- STOCKHOLM - Infuriated by deteriorating service and rising charges, many Swedes have grown tired of big banks and are taking their business to financial start-ups, some on the Internet, others at the grocery store.  http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1007-200-8333800.html?tag=cd_mh 

INTERNET COMPLIANCE
Electronic Delivery of Federally Mandated Disclosures

The Federal Reserve Board published interim final rules to establish uniform standards for the electronic delivery of federally mandated disclosures under five consumer protection regulations: B (Equal Credit Opportunity), E (Electronic Fund Transfers), M (Consumer Leasing), Z (Truth in Lending), and DD (Truth in Savings).

Under the rules, financial institutions, creditors, lessors, and others may deliver disclosures electronically if they obtain consumers' consent in accordance with the requirements of the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act (the "E-Sign Act"), enacted in June 2000. The Board's interim rules provide guidance on the timing and delivery of electronic disclosures, consistent with proposed rules issued by the Board in August 1999, to ensure consumers have adequate opportunity to access and retain the information.

INTERNET SECURITY
- We continue covering some of the issues discussed in the "Risk Management Principles for Electronic Banking" published by the Basel Committee on Bank Supervision in May 2001.

Principle 6: Banks should ensure that clear audit trails exist for all e-banking transactions.

Delivery of financial services over the Internet can make it more difficult for banks to apply and enforce internal controls and maintain clear audit trails if these measures are not adapted to an e-banking environment. Banks are not only challenged to ensure that effective internal control can be provided in highly automated environments, but also that the controls can be independently audited, particularly for all critical e-banking events and applications.

A bank's internal control environment may be weakened if it is unable to maintain clear audit trails for its e-banking activities. This is because much, if not all, of its records and evidence supporting e-banking transactions are in an electronic format. In making a determination as to where clear audit trails should be maintained, the following types of e-banking transactions should be considered:

1)  The opening, modification or closing of a customer’s account.

2)  Any transaction with financial consequences.

3)  Any authorization granted to a customer to exceed a limit.

4)  Any granting, modification or revocation of systems access rights or privileges.


PRIVACY
- We continue covering various issues in the "Privacy of Consumer Financial Information" published by the financial regulatory agencies in May 2001.

Sharing nonpublic personal information with nonaffiliated third parties under Sections 13=, 14, and/or 15 but outside of these exceptions
(Part 1 of 3)

A. Disclosure of Nonpublic Personal Information

1)  Select a sample of third party relationships with nonaffiliated third parties and obtain a sample of data shared between the institution and the third party. The sample should include a cross-section of relationships but should emphasize those that are higher risk in nature as determined by the initial procedures. Perform the following comparisons to evaluate the financial institution's compliance with disclosure limitations.

a.  Compare the data shared and with whom the data were shared to ensure that the institution accurately categorized its information sharing practices and is not sharing nonpublic personal information outside the exceptions (§§13, 14, 15).

b.  Compare the categories of data shared and with whom the data were shared to those stated in the privacy notice and verify that what the institution tells consumers in its notices about its policies and practices in this regard and what the institution actually does are consistent (§§10, 6).

2)  Review contracts with nonaffiliated third parties that perform services for the financial institution not covered by the exceptions in section 14 or 15. Determine whether the contracts adequately prohibit the third party from disclosing or using the information other than to carry out the purposes for which the information was disclosed. Note that the "grandfather" provisions of Section 18 apply to certain of these contracts. (§13(a)).

 

PLEASE NOTE:  Some of the above links may have expired, especially those from news organizations.  We may have a copy of the article, so please e-mail us at examiner@yennik.com if we can be of assistance.  

Back Button

Company Information
Yennik, Inc.

4409 101st Street
Lubbock, Texas 79424
Office 806-798-7119
Examiner@yennik.com

 

Please visit our other web sites:
VISTA penetration-vulnerability testing
The Community Banker - Bank FFIEC & ADA Web Site Audits
Credit Union FFIEC & ADA Web Site Audits - Bank Auditing Services
US Banks on the Internet  
US Credit Unions on the Internet

All rights reserved; Our logo is registered with the United States Patent and Trademark Office.
Terms and Conditions, Privacy Statement, © Copyright Yennik, Incorporated