3 ms·

Replying to you and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21166029 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21166029 It is, and most places that set it up typically

Replying to you and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21166029 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21166029 It is, and most places that set it up typically require a voided check. I was working as a contractor for a large legacy big data company a couple summers ago and getting paid through their contracting agency. Said contracting agency sent me a check image (of my own check) by email TWICE [0]. I was pissed, had to close that account and re-set-up a bunch of banking stuff, and told them they were going to pay me by check because they clearly hadn't the faintest idea how to handle an account number securely. Having a system where you can do this yourself online or with an app without sending check images around is so obviously superior it's laughable that we still do it this way in the US. Lacking a superior system, it's preferable to use a system that doesn't involve trusting a bank account number in an electronic form to a (possibly incompetent) third party. [0] I'd faxed it to them originally along with my I-9 docs. They couldn't read my passport, so they emailed me the image that also included the check. Nevermind that I'd told them that I would not, under any circumstances, be emailing them that data. Sigh.

ghaff 7y ago
What do you think is so secret about the info on your check? You're literally giving it to everyone to whom you write a check.
- mauvehaus 7y ago
  The information on your check is literally the all of information needed to take money out of your bank account. Crucially, if you give one person a check, you're giving that information to one person (and their bank). If you email it, you're giving it to (potentially) all the people. And I'd hazard that the sorts of people who actually try to intercept emails are precisely the sorts of people who wouldn't have qualms about misusing said information. In the US, at least, your doctor's office won't send you anything of substance by email for this reason (probably actually because HIPAA won't allow them to by law for that reason). If email isn't considered secure enough for medical information, it certainly isn't secure enough for bank information. I'm not actually interested in investigating what security has been added to email in the several decades since it's been invented. If banks[0] and the government don't trust it, I'm not about to either. [0] Mine was aghast that anybody would be so foolish as to send a check image by email. They got the wheels moving to close the account and start rejiggering stuff with surprising alacrity, like "this is what you need to do, and Alice the manager will assist you right now."
  - ghaff 7y ago
    >Crucially, if you give one person a check, you're giving that information to one person (and their bank). Well, them, and every other person you've ever written a check to or who has processed direct deposit paperwork, etc. Sending check images by email isn't a good practice of course, but it's really not exposing especially sensitive information given the way checks work in the US.
  - Fredej 7y ago
    In Denmark we have a secure (government controlled) email for communicating securely with government entities and banks. It's where I receive any medical updates from my doctor and any official information from the government. I also receive my payslip, pension info etc. It has cut down a lot on paper usage and made communicating way more efficient.

ghaff 7y ago

What do you think is so secret about the info on your check? You're literally giving it to everyone to whom you write a check.

mauvehaus 7y ago
The information on your check is literally the all of information needed to take money out of your bank account. Crucially, if you give one person a check, you're giving that information to one person (and their bank). If you email it, you're giving it to (potentially) all the people. And I'd hazard that the sorts of people who actually try to intercept emails are precisely the sorts of people who wouldn't have qualms about misusing said information. In the US, at least, your doctor's office won't send you anything of substance by email for this reason (probably actually because HIPAA won't allow them to by law for that reason). If email isn't considered secure enough for medical information, it certainly isn't secure enough for bank information. I'm not actually interested in investigating what security has been added to email in the several decades since it's been invented. If banks[0] and the government don't trust it, I'm not about to either. [0] Mine was aghast that anybody would be so foolish as to send a check image by email. They got the wheels moving to close the account and start rejiggering stuff with surprising alacrity, like "this is what you need to do, and Alice the manager will assist you right now."
- ghaff 7y ago
  >Crucially, if you give one person a check, you're giving that information to one person (and their bank). Well, them, and every other person you've ever written a check to or who has processed direct deposit paperwork, etc. Sending check images by email isn't a good practice of course, but it's really not exposing especially sensitive information given the way checks work in the US.
- Fredej 7y ago
  In Denmark we have a secure (government controlled) email for communicating securely with government entities and banks. It's where I receive any medical updates from my doctor and any official information from the government. I also receive my payslip, pension info etc. It has cut down a lot on paper usage and made communicating way more efficient.