The comments come following concerns from dealer groups and industry associations that the possible susceptibility of the ProctorU software to hacking could pose a problem with the tight security controls mandated by large institutions.
However responding to issues raised in ifa’s report, ProctorU chief executive Scott McFarland said such concerns were “not accurate” and that the company was “at the forefront of setting security and privacy standards” in the remote learning sector.
“For example, ProctorU does not use commercial video conferencing software such as Zoom or GoToMeeting or Google Meet,” Mr McFarland said.
“We use our own secure, proprietary proctoring and communications platform and because of that, ProctorU systems or data have never been compromised.
“Our security programs are audited annually, and we adhere to all international and federal, state and local privacy and data security laws.
“Information is kept only long enough to make sure that a test-taker did not violate testing rules.”
Mr McFarland said the company could not discuss specific security features of the software in order “to maintain the highest security”, but said that “the testing authorities that rely on ProctorU can and do regularly review them”.
He said ProctorU had not come up against issues previously with the software conflicting with the security protocols of major companies, and that the group was “always happy to work with companies and institutions on their specific needs”.
Responding to further reports of problems with connectivity and the processes of individual proctors, Mr McFarland echoed FASEA’s advice that 98 per cent of candidates were typically able to sit an exam successfully through ProctorU.
“Some have hardware or connection issues that require them to reschedule,” he said.
“As you can expect, most of these issues are connectivity issues related to their general internet connection.
“About 6 per cent of all test-takers encounter some technical issue that requires an intervention by our support specialists, and most of those issues are resolved prior to their exam, which results in the 98 per cent completion rate.”
So I presume FASEA did third party due diligence and had a checklist that got sent to the company to be completed with a sign off point once they and their legal and technical bods were completely happy with the information supplied
E.g. firewalls, cyber security policy, password protection, key staff, vetting, privacy act, destruction of old information and any associated entity access etc.
If they did, there would be no problems and they could release a statement to the industry which would nip this in the bud.
If they haven’t then they should self report to ASIC at a minimum and also the government as this is a requirement for licensees complete third party due diligence and report any breaches
Not that the IFA read any comments, however if Someone actually took the time to read the comments, the following question must be asked or demanded by an independent body or Senator Jane Hume
What due diligence did you complete with the company before appointing them?
Banning candidates from having a toilet break for almost 4 hours was absolutely careless by FASEA for those who sat the exam remotely. I felt very sick after the exam.
I think you’ll find that there is a certain type of personality that will always find an excuse, not to do things. Whilst I conceded there are advisers out there with legitimate excuses, there are plenty that don’t . As someone who resides in a regional area, studying, working multiple jobs, I drove 4 hours to sit an exam in a City. Constantly distracted by City noises of sirens and then drove back home, so to see comments here about security and connection is pretty pathetic. These people are usually the ones that have no higher education, are more inward focusing, and therefore will fight or whinge this to the end. There the advisers that have placed us into a position of over regulation, commissions being banned, business valuations falling. I could tell you if they went out and got post graduate qualifications, called for an exam, some self regulation, we’d still have options as to how clients were charged whether it’s fees/commissions/FUM, business multiples at 3 times and less compliance. With six sitting sessions now being held you’re looking like you’re the bottom of the barrell.
The plain fact of the matter is that the Govt need to immediately address the matter of the extraordinary and challenging environment and the significant impact on the time frame for advisers to have the FASEA exam completed.
It is no longer acceptable the Govt continue to put this matter off and create further anxiety and distress to advisers who are not only coping with their own client’s anxiety, affordability, retirement income and loss of employment but also with the significant negative market impacts plus their own high levels of concern, stress and anxiety.
The Govt need to be fair and reasonable based on current circumstances and implement the extension for the FASEA exam through regulation as opposed to delaying this any further due to legislative restrictions and sitting of Parliament.
It is unacceptable the Govt continue to delay this process.
Same security the $10,000 Superannuation withdrawal system had???.I asked the FPA what they are doing and the response is refer to ProcterU website.Nobody will take responsibility if your system is hacked or your information is miss used.How about we have Jail term penalties if there is a breach and then see who who is offering the service?
To qoute Mandy Rice-Davies when Minister Profumo first denied sexual dalliances in 1962 – “he would say that, wouldn’t he ” You can always bank on self-interest – its the only horse in the race that gives 100%. There are security issues.
Dealer Groups and Industry Associations? Hmm. Wasn’t a “security” concern expressed by one dummy from Australian Unity?
Anyway, the FASEA exam “issue” is basically over next month. If you haven’t done it by June 2020, after it has been operating for a year and 6 sittings, then you are likely done in the Industry as you are probably; leaving (voluntarily or forced), too slack, under committed or being way too precious – given that you need a 3 or 4 month plan to do this thing once you book, prepare and wait for results.
what a stupid comment
Bye Ben. Extension or not you’re done I would say.
Another silly comment! ….FYI, I have already passed the exam, have you? !
Yup!
Hmm Some of us might be studying a B.Com Financial Planning Degree with Deakin, have a family, full-time job and prioritised the time to complete the degree first, Yes, I booked the June exam as being in lockdown I will be able to achieve 2 units. I’m not too slack or under committed just different commitments, hopefully you will be lucky enough in life to have the same experiences, helping your kids with all aspects of life
We can only hope @just my view. Agree, I don’t think the Greens will let them delay consumer protection mechanism.