21 April 2005

Monitor 110: Beta test results in re access, searches, and platform security

This is some general feedback and notes about Monitor 110 searches, access, member ID, security, and control of accounts.

  • Google archiving

    For some strange reason Google has a hard time picking up the words related to Monitor 110. Does Google have a direct or indirect financial interest in Monitor 110 through a hedge fund that would act as an incentive for Google not to index information related to Monitor 110?

    Take special note of the search requests that should hit on public information, but the content doesn’t show up in Google.

  • Monitor 110 search codes

    The codes at the end of the Monitor 110 search strings are not interchangeable with PubSub search codes. It is possible to take the search codes from one PubSub subscription and apply them in new situation. This is not the case with Monitor110 and PubSub accounts.

    This means that the Monitor 110 and PubSub coding systems are independent, not interchangeable, and essentially a parallel efforts.

    Notice the errors that occur in one platform that do not occur in another. This will give you an idea of the scope of platform-crossflow during development; and then sense of divergence between the two platforms as they mature.

  • Designated computers

    One of the methods of tracking users, appropriate authorized users, and whether the account is appropriately accessed is to assign accounts based on two checks: The user ID and the computer IP.

    IN the case of Monitor 110, it does not appear this check occurs. Users can sign onto multiple different IPs using the same member ID; and different computers and IPs can be used to access the same member ID and subscription accounts.

    Conversely, there does not appear to be a flagging system that restricts different computers from using the same member ID; or in sharing the same search commands.

  • Member IDs

    Of interest is that an individual user can perform multiple searches with Monitor 110. Yet, these member IDs are not unique to a given IP or computer. A single member ID can be used on multiple computers.

    This raises questions about whether [a] Monitor 110 has a good track of who is using their system, and whether the member ID’s are uniquely assigned; and [2] there are adequate controls over the number of users at a given financial institution.

    It appears as though despite apparent restrictions on the number of users per financial institution, and a pricing model based on the number of subscribers, that the users could share member IDs and use the same member ID on different computers and different IPs.

    Perhaps Monitor 110 is merely assigning the subscription to an IP block without regard to how many users access the information and accounts; and do not care whether different IPs and people are using the same member ID.

    However, this would appear to be contrary to the intent of providing the subscription-based system.

    If Monitor 110 hopes to generate revenue based on the number of subscribers and members, then it needs to ensure

  • that the member IDs are not shared between different people;

  • when a different computer registers the same member ID that there is a check to ensure that they have appropriately registered.
  • This is some general feedback and notes about Monitor 110 searches, access, member ID, security, and control of accounts.

  • Google archiving

    For some strange reason Google has a hard time picking up the words related to Monitor 110. Does Google have a direct or indirect financial interest in Monitor 110 through a hedge fund that would act as an incentive for Google not to index information related to Monitor 110?

    Take special note of the search requests that should hit on public information, but the content doesn’t show up in Google.

  • Monitor 110 search codes

    The codes at the end of the Monitor 110 search strings are not interchangeable with PubSub search codes. It is possible to take the search codes from one PubSub subscription and apply them in new situation. This is not the case with Monitor110 and PubSub accounts.

    This means that the Monitor 110 and PubSub coding systems are independent, not interchangeable, and essentially a parallel efforts.

    Notice the errors that occur in one platform that do not occur in another. This will give you an idea of the scope of platform-crossflow during development; and then sense of divergence between the two platforms as they mature.

  • Designated computers

    One of the methods of tracking users, appropriate authorized users, and whether the account is appropriately accessed is to assign accounts based on two checks: The user ID and the computer IP.

    IN the case of Monitor 110, it does not appear this check occurs. Users can sign onto multiple different IPs using the same member ID; and different computers and IPs can be used to access the same member ID and subscription accounts.

    Conversely, there does not appear to be a flagging system that restricts different computers from using the same member ID; or in sharing the same search commands.

  • Member IDs

    Of interest is that an individual user can perform multiple searches with Monitor 110. Yet, these member IDs are not unique to a given IP or computer. A single member ID can be used on multiple computers.

    This raises questions about whether [a] Monitor 110 has a good track of who is using their system, and whether the member ID’s are uniquely assigned; and [2] there are adequate controls over the number of users at a given financial institution.

    It appears as though despite apparent restrictions on the number of users per financial institution, and a pricing model based on the number of subscribers, that the users could share member IDs and use the same member ID on different computers and different IPs.

    Perhaps Monitor 110 is merely assigning the subscription to an IP block without regard to how many users access the information and accounts; and do not care whether different IPs and people are using the same member ID.

    However, this would appear to be contrary to the intent of providing the subscription-based system.

    If Monitor 110 hopes to generate revenue based on the number of subscribers and members, then it needs to ensure

  • that the member IDs are not shared between different people;

  • when a different computer registers the same member ID that there is a check to ensure that they have appropriately registered.
    " />