<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <title>Tumbleweed Rants</title>
  <subtitle>Stefano's World</subtitle>
  <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://tumbleweed.org.za/2008/05/28/natwest-letter"/>
  <link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://tumbleweed.org.za/node/134/atom/feed"/>
  <id>http://tumbleweed.org.za/node/134/atom/feed</id>
  <updated>2008-06-03T16:15:15+00:00</updated>
  <entry>
    <title>An open letter to NatWest bank</title>
    <link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://tumbleweed.org.za/2008/05/28/natwest-letter" />
    <id>http://tumbleweed.org.za/2008/05/28/natwest-letter</id>
    <published>2008-05-28T16:27:30+00:00</published>
    <updated>2008-06-03T16:15:15+00:00</updated>
    <author>
      <name>tumbleweed</name>
    </author>
    <category term="banking" />
    <category term="natwest" />
    <category term="rant" />
    <summary type="html"><![CDATA[<blockquote>
  <p>Subject: Strict&nbsp;Browser&nbsp;restrictions</p>
  
  <p>Hi, I&#8217;m a customer of yours, and a <span class="caps"><span class="caps">GNU</span></span>/Linux user who gets frequently
  frustrated by your&nbsp;browser&nbsp;detection.</p>
  
  <p>Basically, the problem is that very few web browsers have been
  certified with your website. Now, I have no real issue with that,
  nobody has enough time to try <em>every</em> web browser in the world, and
  adjust their websites to fit around every browser&#8217;s bugs. <em>But</em> that
  doesn&#8217;t mean it&#8217;s acceptable to reject your users with a message like
  &#8220;The Internet browser you are using is not supported by online banking.
  Use the link below to see the complete list of browsers&nbsp;we&nbsp;support.&#8221;</p>
  
  <p>Firstly, the browsers I use <em>are</em> listed as being supported on your
  list <a href="http://www.natwest.com/personal/day-to-day/online-banking/g1/faqs.ashx">[1]</a>:</p>
  
  <ul>
  <li>On this laptop, I use a Firefox 3.0 beta. Firefox 3.0 is listed is
  being supported, and it works (if I tweak it to identify it as
  Firefox 2.0, then I can use the site&nbsp;just&nbsp;fine).</li>
  <li>On my desktops, I use Iceweasel 2.x. Iceweasel is Firefox with a
  different name, to get around trademark issues. Ask your
  Linux-techies, they should know about it. Again, it works&nbsp;as&nbsp;expected.</li>
  </ul>
  
  <p>Secondly, <a href="http://www.natwest.com/personal/day-to-day/online-banking/g1/faqs.ashx">[1]</a> states: &#8220;Netscape, Mozilla and Firefox users with other
  operating systems such as Linux may also be able to access the
  service.&#8221; How are we supposed to access the service if you deny&nbsp;us&nbsp;access?</p>
  
  <p>More generally, locking out unknown browsers goes completely against
  your policy of Accessibility <a href="http://www.natwest.com/popup/global/access.ashx">[2]</a>. While the <span class="caps"><span class="caps">WAI</span></span> <a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT">[3]</a> doesn&#8217;t
  specifically recommend against turning away unknown browsers, I think
  you&#8217;ll find that&#8217;s because the authors didn&#8217;t even <em>dream</em> of
  <em>considering</em> such a thing. The <em>entire point</em> of <span class="caps"><span class="caps">WAI</span></span>, is to make your
  site as portable as possible, and to work for everyone with a far
  wider variety of user agents than you could ever&nbsp;test&nbsp;with.</p>
  
  <p>I don&#8217;t know how you can call yourself <span class="caps"><span class="caps">WAI</span></span>-compliant and reject
  un-&#8220;certified&#8221; browsers. Your webmasters should hang their heads&nbsp;in&nbsp;shame.</p>
  
  <p>Now, I don&#8217;t intend to rant any more than that, because that&#8217;s the
  only problem I have with your site (and your service). Beyond this
  little niggle (which stops me being able to bank, without configuring
  my browser to lie) I&#8217;m very impressed with&nbsp;your&nbsp;services.</p>
  
  <p>Please sort this out, it&#8217;ll turn me back into a&nbsp;happy&nbsp;customer.</p>
  
  <p><span class="caps"><span class="caps">SR</span></span></p>
  
  <p><span class="caps"><span class="caps">PS</span></span>: I&#8217;d have sent this by e-mail, where I&#8217;d, but you don&#8217;t provide any
     e-mail contact details on your site.
  <span class="caps"><span class="caps">PPS</span></span>: Only providing a small feedback form doesn&#8217;t help users give you
      real feedback, it just intimidates and&nbsp;irritates&nbsp;them.</p>
  
  <p>[1]: <a href="http://www.natwest.com/personal/day-to-day/online-banking/g1/faqs.ashx">http://www.natwest.com/personal/day-to-day/online-banking/g1/faqs.ashx</a><br />
  [2]: <a href="http://www.natwest.com/popup/global/access.ashx">http://www.natwest.com/popup/global/access.ashx</a><br />
  [3]: <a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT">http://www.w3.org/<span class="caps"><span class="caps">TR</span></span>/<span class="caps"><span class="caps">WAI</span></span>-<span class="caps"><span class="caps">WEBCONTENT</span></span>/</a></p>
  
  <p>&#8212;<br />
  Stefano Rivera<br />
   http://rivera.za.net/<br />
   H: +27 21 794 7937   C: +27 72&nbsp;419&nbsp;8559</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Now, that was rather harsh to them, but this has been irritating me for ages. Then, when I did decide to <em>do something</em> about it, I was rather worked up,&nbsp;and&nbsp;ranted.</p>

<p>I got a call back from NatWest this morning, and was basically told that they aren&#8217;t going to change anything. I can understand their position, but I don&#8217;t that they were seeing mine. (Oh, and I think they&nbsp;are&nbsp;wrong.)</p>

<p>The reasons I was given for this non-approved&nbsp;lockout&nbsp;are:</p>

<ol>
<li>Support. But of course, if your web site is decent, then you shouldn&#8217;t have any support issues. (<span class="caps"><span class="caps">OK</span></span>, that&#8217;s rather utopic, but the kind of people who use alternative browsers will be <span class="caps"><span class="caps">OK</span></span> in&nbsp;such&nbsp;situations).</li>
<li>Security. Apparently Opera caches previously visited pages as they were. Clicking back doesn&#8217;t revalidate with the server, and so someone who&#8217;s logged out of their Internet banking and gone on to google still has their private data visible in the history. Anyone coming up to their computer can go back&nbsp;to&nbsp;it.</li>
</ol>

<p>Now, I don&#8217;t think point 2 is NatWest&#8217;s problem. If Opera doesn&#8217;t support revalidation, then Opera must fix it. If Opera do, and NatWest doesn&#8217;t send the correct Pragma headers, then it&#8217;s&nbsp;NatWest&#8217;s&nbsp;problem.</p>

<p>But still, that doesn&#8217;t mean you lock-out untested browers, dammit. <em>Especially</em> if you call yourself&nbsp;<span class="caps"><span class="caps">WAI</span></span>-compliant.</p>

<p>I&#8217;d love to see some feedback from a <span class="caps"><span class="caps">WAI</span></span> board member on this type of issue. I don&#8217;t think the <span class="caps"><span class="caps">WAI</span></span> specs&nbsp;address&nbsp;it.</p>

<p>Oh, and everyone, please stand up for your right to browse the web however you see fit. If more people did so, these kind of issues would crop up&nbsp;less&nbsp;often.</p>
    ]]></summary>
    <content type="html"><![CDATA[<blockquote>
  <p>Subject: Strict Browser&nbsp;restrictions</p>
  
  <p>Hi, I&#8217;m a customer of yours, and a <span class="caps">GNU</span>/Linux user who gets frequently
  frustrated by your browser&nbsp;detection.</p>
  
  <p>Basically, the problem is that very few web browsers have been
  certified with your website. Now, I have no real issue with that,
  nobody has enough time to try <em>every</em> web browser in the world, and
  adjust their websites to fit around every browser&#8217;s bugs. <em>But</em> that
  doesn&#8217;t mean it&#8217;s acceptable to reject your users with a message like
  &#8220;The Internet browser you are using is not supported by online banking.
  Use the link below to see the complete list of browsers we&nbsp;support.&#8221;</p>
  
  <p>Firstly, the browsers I use <em>are</em> listed as being supported on your
  list <a href="http://www.natwest.com/personal/day-to-day/online-banking/g1/faqs.ashx">[1]</a>:</p>
  
  <ul>
  <li>On this laptop, I use a Firefox 3.0 beta. Firefox 3.0 is listed is
  being supported, and it works (if I tweak it to identify it as
  Firefox 2.0, then I can use the site just&nbsp;fine).</li>
  <li>On my desktops, I use Iceweasel 2.x. Iceweasel is Firefox with a
  different name, to get around trademark issues. Ask your
  Linux-techies, they should know about it. Again, it works as&nbsp;expected.</li>
  </ul>
  
  <p>Secondly, <a href="http://www.natwest.com/personal/day-to-day/online-banking/g1/faqs.ashx">[1]</a> states: &#8220;Netscape, Mozilla and Firefox users with other
  operating systems such as Linux may also be able to access the
  service.&#8221; How are we supposed to access the service if you deny us&nbsp;access?</p>
  
  <p>More generally, locking out unknown browsers goes completely against
  your policy of Accessibility <a href="http://www.natwest.com/popup/global/access.ashx">[2]</a>. While the <span class="caps">WAI</span> <a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT">[3]</a> doesn&#8217;t
  specifically recommend against turning away unknown browsers, I think
  you&#8217;ll find that&#8217;s because the authors didn&#8217;t even <em>dream</em> of
  <em>considering</em> such a thing. The <em>entire point</em> of <span class="caps">WAI</span>, is to make your
  site as portable as possible, and to work for everyone with a far
  wider variety of user agents than you could ever test&nbsp;with.</p>
  
  <p>I don&#8217;t know how you can call yourself <span class="caps">WAI</span>-compliant and reject
  un-&#8220;certified&#8221; browsers. Your webmasters should hang their heads in&nbsp;shame.</p>
  
  <p>Now, I don&#8217;t intend to rant any more than that, because that&#8217;s the
  only problem I have with your site (and your service). Beyond this
  little niggle (which stops me being able to bank, without configuring
  my browser to lie) I&#8217;m very impressed with your&nbsp;services.</p>
  
  <p>Please sort this out, it&#8217;ll turn me back into a happy&nbsp;customer.</p>
  
  <p><span class="caps">SR</span></p>
  
  <p><span class="caps">PS</span>: I&#8217;d have sent this by e-mail, where I&#8217;d, but you don&#8217;t provide any
     e-mail contact details on your site.
  <span class="caps">PPS</span>: Only providing a small feedback form doesn&#8217;t help users give you
      real feedback, it just intimidates and irritates&nbsp;them.</p>
  
  <p>[1]: <a href="http://www.natwest.com/personal/day-to-day/online-banking/g1/faqs.ashx">http://www.natwest.com/personal/day-to-day/online-banking/g1/faqs.ashx</a><br />
  [2]: <a href="http://www.natwest.com/popup/global/access.ashx">http://www.natwest.com/popup/global/access.ashx</a><br />
  [3]: <a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT">http://www.w3.org/<span class="caps">TR</span>/<span class="caps">WAI</span>-<span class="caps">WEBCONTENT</span>/</a></p>
  
  <p>&#8212;<br />
  Stefano Rivera<br />
   http://rivera.za.net/<br />
   H: +27 21 794 7937   C: +27 72 419&nbsp;8559</p>
</blockquote>

<p>Now, that was rather harsh to them, but this has been irritating me for ages. Then, when I did decide to <em>do something</em> about it, I was rather worked up, and&nbsp;ranted.</p>

<p>I got a call back from NatWest this morning, and was basically told that they aren&#8217;t going to change anything. I can understand their position, but I don&#8217;t that they were seeing mine. (Oh, and I think they are&nbsp;wrong.)</p>

<p>The reasons I was given for this non-approved lockout&nbsp;are:</p>

<ol>
<li>Support. But of course, if your web site is decent, then you shouldn&#8217;t have any support issues. (<span class="caps">OK</span>, that&#8217;s rather utopic, but the kind of people who use alternative browsers will be <span class="caps">OK</span> in such&nbsp;situations).</li>
<li>Security. Apparently Opera caches previously visited pages as they were. Clicking back doesn&#8217;t revalidate with the server, and so someone who&#8217;s logged out of their Internet banking and gone on to google still has their private data visible in the history. Anyone coming up to their computer can go back to&nbsp;it.</li>
</ol>

<p>Now, I don&#8217;t think point 2 is NatWest&#8217;s problem. If Opera doesn&#8217;t support revalidation, then Opera must fix it. If Opera do, and NatWest doesn&#8217;t send the correct Pragma headers, then it&#8217;s NatWest&#8217;s&nbsp;problem.</p>

<p>But still, that doesn&#8217;t mean you lock-out untested browers, dammit. <em>Especially</em> if you call yourself&nbsp;<span class="caps">WAI</span>-compliant.</p>

<p>I&#8217;d love to see some feedback from a <span class="caps">WAI</span> board member on this type of issue. I don&#8217;t think the <span class="caps">WAI</span> specs address&nbsp;it.</p>

<p>Oh, and everyone, please stand up for your right to browse the web however you see fit. If more people did so, these kind of issues would crop up less&nbsp;often.</p>
    ]]></content>
  </entry>
</feed>
