3 ms·
As much as I'd like computer security to become a solved problem, this outlook is ignoring the banks role in the transaction. In my opinion banks don't go far e
by freehunter 8y ago
As much as I'd like computer security to become a solved problem, this outlook is ignoring the banks role in the transaction. In my opinion banks don't go far enough to verify identity or to verify a transaction is legitimate. The fact that someone who has never met me can walk into a bank with some pieces of information they got on the Internet and open a new bank account or credit card is scary. That's why it's so easy to refund this fraud, because banks don't want people to realize that their security is just a bunch of meaningless paperwork.
I also don't think people losing their life savings will change anything. Ponzi schemes are still a big thing, MLM is still a big thing, Nigerian princes are still a big thing, and people lose it all through those scams constantly. The state of bank security is so bad that every time I write a check, I'm giving the recipient my bank's name, my account number, my home address, and my signature. That's a lot of sensitive information that a phisher could do some real damage with.
Ultimately, if a fraudulent transaction clears the bank, it is the bank's fault. It's their job to verify transactions and verify identity before clearing the transaction. In a perfect world, financial malware would cease to exist because bank security was locked down so tight that fraudulent transactions would never clear.
- sliken 8y agoI agree. Kinda baffled why banks don't push for a hardened hardware platform. I've always wanted a hardware token type widget that would display any pending transactions on my credit card. If I push the approve button the transaction would be signed with my public key and sent to the vendor. Seems insane that my credit card number is displayed in plain text to anyone I deal with in the physical world and is enough for anyone else on the planet to charge my account.