4 ms·
Having banks have an API is far different than telling Apple to share access to how the interface with those APIs. If anything it probably is a push by state ac
by Shivetya 7y ago
Having banks have an API is far different than telling Apple to share access to how the interface with those APIs. If anything it probably is a push by state actors who hope their intelligence services can use the hooks to circumvent the security Apple and even Android users have from their devices. Apple is not preventing you from using a bank or accessing your funds in that bank, they are just offering up a new secure means to do so. Your bank still has to play along. Now if Apple was exclusive then we would have an issue
So by this logic, anyone who has a device which supports NFC payments and can load an app from a third party must allow access to methods the hardware performs the handshake/connection? So why not just say all parts of the phone must be fully exposed, why not demand that apps can make the phone calls?
I have two major issues with these demands. First being it simply is more likely a means for state actors to have more opportunities for back doors violating the trust people put into their devices.
the second is what is to prevent every damn bank and store from demanding you only use their app because you know that will happen.
- Despegar 7y ago>If anything it probably is a push by state actors who hope their intelligence services can use the hooks to circumvent the security Apple and even Android users have from their devices. It's not anything cloak-and-dagger like that. It's really just politicians leaning in on the side of their banks in a commercial negotiation with Apple.
- Terretta 7y agoIt’s the question whether the device “is” the wallet or the bank’s app “is” the wallet. I think for reasons similar to what grandparent mentions, I prefer it be the device, like the hardware btc wallets. Regulations shouldn’t crack open a toaster, and shouldn’t crack open a PDA.