3 ms·
> running either Apple's or Google's proprietary OS And specifically a non-rooted, locked bootloader, remotely attested version. Running your own code on your
by didntcheck 3y ago
> running either Apple's or Google's proprietary OS
And specifically a non-rooted, locked bootloader, remotely attested version. Running your own code on your own device is suspicious behavior you know! This is already somewhat the case with banking apps, but luckily it's usually possible to hide root for now
And, yes, I get there are legitimate worries about malware and that does kind of solve them, but we've managed with desktop web banking (though not if Google's proposal succeeds). AFAIK most financial scams are executed by social engineering. 2FA (which is now mandated in the EU) is a more effective protection than locking down one endpoint
Barclay's was doing 2FA via an offline code generator (looks like a calculator) where you put in your card and entered a PIN since what feels like at least 10 years ago. I know most users would prefer mobile 2FA, but I wish they'd kept that as an option, whereas AFAIK they're phasing it out
In any case, de facto saying "you must pay dues to either Apple or Google to bank on the go" is quite bad for free competition
- csours 3y ago> Running your own code on your own device is suspicious behavior you know! Loss of TAM by excluding rooted device: less than 1% Ratio of problems per rooted device vs problems per non-rooted device: More than 100% It's not YOUR fault that it's one of the most meaningful heuristics, but that also doesn't stop it from being a meaningful heuristic.
- yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago> Ratio of problems per rooted device vs problems per non-rooted device: More than 100% What problems would those be?