Just curious, why would you spend days resolving this? What was the amount of money here?
But yes anyone who has worked with the list of sanctioned persons circulated by the US government understands what a joke this is. Last time I looked Saddam Hussein was still on it, despite being dead for most of my life at this point. I've also been informed by at least one C-level exec that it was vitally important that we prohibit North Korean internet users from using our website.
> Just curious, why would you spend days resolving this? What was the amount of money here?
Is the implication here that the should walk away from being robbed of 170 quid? They're fighting for dignified treatment.
I know this is an example of another problem, but in the US it's easy to see someone actually being killed over attempting to rob someone of $200.
People have strong reactions to unjust treatment, especially when they believe they are dealing with a fair system. (I feel it's different when you know you just have to pay the bribe.)
>Just curious, why would you spend days resolving this?
Monzo couldn't reverse the transfer as the money wasn't in their hands. Wise Transfer customer support is just garbage. I spent 5 hours on a phone until > their side < ended my call during UK working hours. I called again and again, they never answered. I sent them emails, but each email I was getting was from another person who, like I said in another comment, didn't read previous email from Wise, so each time I had to explain the context and the whole situation. When I sent my response in a morning, they responded the next day afternoon.
> What was the amount of money here?
About £170 for the conference ticket.
>But yes anyone who has worked with the list of sanctioned persons circulated by the US government understands what a joke this is.
I already paid for hotel and plane tickets without issues. Best to my knowledge I'm not involved in any terrorist organisation, unless you account working for EU banking infrastructure company as such.
You're telling me that if I wanted to make an easy 170 quid all I need to do is scam you. You're not going to fight back.
You don't stand up to a bully just for their initial transgression. You stand up to a bully because if you don't they'll come at you again, even harder, and the world will see that you're soft, that you're a mark.
Having been scammed once out of a similar amount, yeah of course I'm not going bother. I've got better things to do with my life. Now there are many times when companies did try similar scams and it was resolved with a 15 minute phone call. But there is no way I'd spend days of my life over it. Almost all scams like this are resolved by opening a dispute with my credit card processor. That's it. I get the money back and never hear anything back.
> I've also been informed by at least one C-level exec that it was vitally important that we prohibit North Korean internet users from using our website.
The problem is, all you can virtually do is to block North Korean IP space [1], but you're still legally liable if North Korean users, say, use a foreign VPN service to interact with you.
International sanctions laws are pure and utter madness, with extremely high stakes if the government changes its course on selective enforcement, so everyone is "playing it safe" rather than "doing what makes sense and question outright bullshit".
My point is, what is the definition of "due diligence"? Who can say "yes, you're doing everything required"?
Usually, that's court cases and resulting case law, as well as executive fines... which means there is an insane amount of risk attached to everything related to sanctions, and additionally enforcement may vary between different governments.
Interpreting and complying with laws is something all business have to deal with, and not just with sanctions. I am not a lawyer, but due diligence is usually “do the best you can with the data you can reasonably get”. If you need to comply with sanctions law then you should ask your corporate lawyer.
Either way, your company is required to follow the law regardless of your opinion on it.
There are many ways. The most common are: If the users tell you they're from North Korea, you can tell that they're from North Korea. Also, if they connect from a North Korean IP, you can tell that they're from North Korea.
> And what sensitive information could they access? It’s defacto public.
The request likely had nothing to do with "sensitive information", but instead, sanctions.
> I've also been informed by at least one C-level exec that it was vitally important that we prohibit North Korean internet users from using our website.
that's an order I would break; to do that goes against the principles of the internet.
I suppose I'm not getting hired any time soon.
yea, I'm not 'obedient' enough... I have principles like open internet, shared culture, freedom, and so on.
what's worse, I feel for Korean culture, split in half by AmeriRussian "interactions".
It's not an order, embargo laws exist in every modern country. Doing business in embargoed countries just means prison time and fines. I don't know if you realize this, but almost nobody in NK has internet...
> I feel for Korean culture, split in half by AmeriRussian "interactions".
Germany reunified. Korea might have as well had it not been for North Korea's invasion of South Korea, and China's support of North Korea as a buffer zone.
And why no blame for Japan?
And what "internet principles" are you writing about? Everyone can access everything? This hasn't ever been the case. There have always been access controls.
(Of course, sometimes it takes breaking the law to change the law. Revolutions, for example, have never been lawful. Governments may even praise a revolution - especially the ones that brought them to power, - yet they would always make sure that any future revolution is illegal.)
But yes anyone who has worked with the list of sanctioned persons circulated by the US government understands what a joke this is. Last time I looked Saddam Hussein was still on it, despite being dead for most of my life at this point. I've also been informed by at least one C-level exec that it was vitally important that we prohibit North Korean internet users from using our website.