I'm just guessing here, but think about it this way. If they didn't insist that people do this what would happen?
Many people are clueless about security and probably shouldn't be doing online banking.
If they insist you do this after a compromise; it might weed out people who don't know how to keep their computers secure.
Banks take this stuff very seriously. They have no control over how secure customers keep their computers and what websites they visit to pick up garbage.
I think it be a very tough area to work in a bank.
I have found that Wells Fargo is clueless about security.
When I first started online “everything” almost 20 years ago now, I thought that would be a reasonable thing for online banks and businesses to demand (to force their customers to have up to date antivirus on their computers). But then I reasoned, “Well, if they do that, then they open themselves up to all kinds of liability issues with customer’s COMPUTERS”.
You see that’s what I can’t “get” here: Wells-Fargo is insisting people have anti-virus on their computers as a precondition for reimbursement of unauthorized transactions?!? Well, what if that customer installs an anti-virus program that doesn’t work very well. Or worse, causes PROBLEMS in that computer? Is Wells-Fargo going to pay to have that COMPUTER fixed?! After all, they were the ones that demanded it be INSTALLED and RUN in the first place!
And beyond all that.......
HOW is someone supposed to “prove” to them they did run a virus check and it was clean? How could that possibly be done? The more I think about it right now, it seems to be a catch 22:
I call back a week later with a complaint of an unauthorized charge and this is how it could go:
“I have an unauthorized charge”
“Did you perform a virus check when we asked you to?”
“Yes”
“You need to prove you did before we will reimburse you for the money”.
And then let’s say I somehow CAN “prove” I ran it when they asked me to, but the unauthorized charge occurred before that. Then what? I’m not responsible or I am responsible?
I’m going to have to go to COURT to get this money back?! Hire computer experts to “prove” I secured my computer as much as I could? It’s CRAZY!
Personally, I have yet to be able to force myself to have a lot of sympathy for people who get “hacked” and or infected with such personal information-stealing malware if they have not taken at least rudimentary steps to prevent it. Anyone clueless enough to not “know” that there is a danger - especially if running Windows - probably isn’t bright enough to be trusted to use the internet for anything information-sensitive anyway.
I don’t have a problem with Wells having a policy that they are not responsible if you don’t take such steps... if there is a risk.
But at this time, there is still absolutely ZERO risk to a Macintosh user with up-to-date software (or even out-of-date for that matter). The “less than a handful” of malware that supposedly can “infect” a mac - none steal such info or hack accounts, and so far have not even been shown to self-replicate.
But to be quite honest - it doesn’t matter what platform computer you use (nor will antivirus software help) when you respond to a phishing scam email or link... those don’t use a virus or worm to get your info - you voluntarily give it, thinking you are doing something legitimate.
If a Mac user finds that an online account has been “hacked” - there are really only two possibilities: Either the business’s web site was hacked, or you gave out your info voluntarily (see the previous paragraph). For Wells to suggest that you need to scan your computer - they are idiots. Even a Windows users is FAR more likely to have a security compromise from voluntarily answering phishing scams than from malware.