Last week’s House Financial Services Committee on Internet gambling featured a letter stated that online poker games could be compromised. While that isn’t surprising, especially considering recent scandals that have come to light from barely reputable poker sites. PPA Chairman John Papas deftly turned the letter into a positive for the cause of online poker by suggesting the FBI’s concerns are best addressed by regulating poker rather than it continuing underground unfettered and unchecked.
Papas fired off this statement in response: “The letter misconstrues much about the current state of online poker, but it does so in a way that clearly makes the case for why federal oversight is necessary. Licensing and regulation is the most protective measure we can take to ensure the online community can be properly monitored while maintaining our Internet freedom.”
The letter was a bit of an eye-opener as the FBI Cyber Division Assistant Director Shawn Henry stated that it only takes two or three players working together to compromise the integrity of a site. That surely has to raise some Congresspeople’s eyebrows, but all the more reason to have more security hoops for the operators to jump through. Even worse, is the suggestion that vendors would base their product’s security by using a purely cost-benefit analysis.
The FBI fears a lot of things from poker, perhaps one of them which Henry didn’t state was shouldering more responsibility in the policing of it. In fact, he sidestepped whether or not his personnel was qualified to be Internet highway patrolmen. In the FBI’s job description, Cyberterrorism yes, guarding poker sites not so much. The FBI already monitors the game for signs of illegal money laundering and likely would have to double their efforts in tracking the flow of money to and from accounts around the world.
Some of Henry’s security concerns focused on the minutia of the site’s execution of their fail-safes. If poker was legalized how could a site really ID a potential user, not only to verify they are old enough to play but also to verify they are who they say they are. Credit card fraud and identity theft is already a big concern and funneling stolen money through a poker site could give clever thieves their own ultra-quick filtering method. Henry mentioned the fear of automated poker bots, clever computers outplaying humans and operators fleecing hundreds of players. Even worse those bots working in collusion and rapidly skewing the odds at any and every table. As every hacker knows the bigger the hurdle, the more destruction caused when it’s jumped.
The location of the user is also reliant on technology that is a bit dusty and imperfect compared to it’s feature film depictions. Maybe not the FBI’s software but the equipment the poker rooms are operating with, which only goes to show that technology should be used to safeguard the sites rather then let them languish on antique platforms. Though the FBI is not just fearful of third party criminals there is some concern as far as the operators themselves rigging the games with fake players and multi-accounts. Okay, fearful is a strong word, to better state it, the FBI is aware of that possibility.
Just goes to show you the fears many of them artificial and some genuine are better served to protect a large segment of the populace that is going to play regardless. The comparison has been made of restricting online poker to Prohibition. There may be some benefits to it but in the long run too many people are hurt by the industry going underground. While others try to make the parallel between poker and legalizing marijuana these issues should stand alone. Convincing Congress the game is a battle of wits and skill is made a lot easier when not said in the same conversation with the merits of people getting high. Papas did a good job addressing the FBI’s concerns and in truth used the letter to urge regulation and make his case for him.