4 ms·

Honestly, I just hate how insecure and legacy everything involving banking in this country is. For example, payroll - there's literally no reason your employer

Honestly, I just hate how insecure and legacy everything involving banking in this country is. For example, payroll - there's literally no reason your employer needs to store your account and routing number as another piece of your personal info that they can lose when some hacker finds out their MySQL admin password is "admin" Like, the system should be that you give your employer your banks name, plus a UUID associated with your account that allows entitys to deposit but not withdraw funds for you account. It would be trivial to implement and make things much more secure, but instead we're stuck with the account+routing number system that's basically paper checks but put on a computer.

paulddraper 3y ago
And most utility/etc bills will require ACH (or a payment fee). So now Bob's Valley Energy Inc has the information to empty your account. --- (Though FWIW, probably neither your employer nor your utility company is storing the information themselves in a MySQL db.)
- lxgr 3y ago
  But if they do, can't you just call your bank and ask for the ACH debit to be reversed? I've never had to actually do this myself, but as far as I understand, there's a process for that just like for credit card chargebacks, and a legal requirement to do so within 10 days of reporting the problem to your bank. Of course being out the money for 10 days is not pleasant; I also do wish there were ways to limit ACH payments a bit more proactively.
clintonb 3y ago
> It would be trivial to implement and make things much more secure… If it were truly trivial, this would have been implemented long ago. This isn’t a pure engineering problem as much as it’s a “convincing people to do it” problem.
- tjader 3y ago
  It is implemented in most of the world outside of the US. It is scary that the info you need to deposit funds into an account in the US also allows you to withdraw funds from it.
  - otteromkram 3y ago
    With approval (eg - PIN or password) you might be able to withdrawal funds. But, can't you say the same thing about a credit card? Heck, you don't even need a password for that; everything you need is right on the card. Or, your mobile device (if you pay through near-field tech)?
    - tjader 3y ago
      If you need PIN or password, why are people so scared of giving out account numbers?
    - dqv 3y ago
      >With approval (eg - PIN or password) you might be able to withdrawal funds. Not to sound like someone who wants to get your bank details, but which bank allows you to delay ACH payments until you approve them? All someone needs to get money from my account is the (publicly available) routing number for my bank and my account number. Boom. Now I'm paying someone else's Verizon bill and have to call my bank and say "I can't believe you think I'm someone who would waste money with Verizon!". What I really want is access control for all ACH transactions. They said it wasn't possible for me to do an allowlist for ACH. I basically just have to call any time a fraudulent transaction comes through to stop payment. OTOH, with certain card issuers (AmEx I think?), I can simply press a button to declare a transaction fraudulent. >But, can't you say the same thing about a credit card? Heck, you don't even need a password for that; everything you need is right on the card. Checks have that too. Except there are hundreds of copies of them. Someone just needs to see one check to get all the information they need to withdraw from your account. OTOH, I turn my debit card off, so having that information is useless unless someone knows when it's on. I can actually do this with most of my cards, debit and credit. Coupled with virtual credit cards, it's a really effective way to secure money. Or at least have stricter control than a classic bank account.
dqv 3y ago
I mean take a page from cryptocurrencies [0] and allow multiple wallets. Then add on access control. Payroll is always going to want to be able to pull back from the “wallet”, but that doesn’t mean there can’t be some access control mechanism that says “only payroll can push to or pull from this wallet address”. [0]: or whatever thing one wants to say is responsible for generating the idea of multiple electronic wallets. I get that some people think crypto is dumb. Take your pick on what was responsible for this idea.
lmz 3y ago
As a non American, the idea of a bank account number being a kind of secret that is usable to pull money out of the account is the most curious thing to me. I guess something like this can only exist in a high trust environment.
- paulddraper 3y ago
  As an American, I am perplexed by the fill-now-pay-after European gas pumps. I suppose something like that can only exist in a high trust environment.
  - blacksmith_tb 3y ago
    Not trying to wade into a continental dispute, but weren't gas pumps in the US also fill-then-pay until maybe 10-15 yr ago? I find it strange that you now have to basically guess about how much it will cost and then authorize a purchase up to that amount, instead of, you know, paying for however much actually got pumped (at today's price).
    - toasterlovin 3y ago
      You typically authorize payment with a card before pumping, then the final amount is captured by the gas station after you're done. You only have to guess the amount if you're paying cash or if the pump card reader is broken and you have to pay inside. It's the same concept as paying for a meal at a sit down restaurant: they authorize your card for the check amount plus some extra, then you write in the tip on the receipt, then the restaurant captures the correct amount later (at least, that's historically how it works, many restaurants are shifting to payment terminals where it's all done at once).
      - lmm 3y ago
        > It's the same concept as paying for a meal at a sit down restaurant: they authorize your card for the check amount plus some extra, then you write in the tip on the receipt, then the restaurant captures the correct amount later (at least, that's historically how it works, many restaurants are shifting to payment terminals where it's all done at once). You what? That's bizzare.
chrismcb 3y ago
Laws. The American banking system has to many draconian regulations coupled with "know your customer" and any money laundering laws, it makes banking difficult. And hard to disrupt
lxgr 3y ago
> your employer needs to store your account and routing number as another piece of your personal info that they can lose Having grown up with banking outside the US, even that concern seems largely bizarre to me. Bank account numbers are routing identifiers, which have no business being used as bearer tokens! To be fair, the same thing (i.e. direct debits that can be initiated using only somebody's account and routing number) is possible in many other countries as well, but usually it's only used for very low-risk payments, since reversals are usually just a click away, with no recourse for the (former) payee. > Like, the system should be that you give your employer your banks name, plus a UUID associated with your account that allows entitys to deposit but not withdraw funds for you account. That UUID is just the account number. What needs to change is being able to initiate debits from somebody's account using only the account number; being able to make credit transfers to them is usually not a problem. For example, I don't see why banks can't offer two forms of account numbers: One that's only usable for inbound payments (and automatically bounces debits of any form, whether (fraudulent) check or ACH), and one that allows debits as well, possibly even limited to a single payee.

paulddraper 3y ago

And most utility/etc bills will require ACH (or a payment fee). So now Bob's Valley Energy Inc has the information to empty your account. --- (Though FWIW, probably neither your employer nor your utility company is storing the information themselves in a MySQL db.)

lxgr 3y ago
But if they do, can't you just call your bank and ask for the ACH debit to be reversed? I've never had to actually do this myself, but as far as I understand, there's a process for that just like for credit card chargebacks, and a legal requirement to do so within 10 days of reporting the problem to your bank. Of course being out the money for 10 days is not pleasant; I also do wish there were ways to limit ACH payments a bit more proactively.

clintonb 3y ago

> It would be trivial to implement and make things much more secure… If it were truly trivial, this would have been implemented long ago. This isn’t a pure engineering problem as much as it’s a “convincing people to do it” problem.

tjader 3y ago
It is implemented in most of the world outside of the US. It is scary that the info you need to deposit funds into an account in the US also allows you to withdraw funds from it.
- otteromkram 3y ago
  With approval (eg - PIN or password) you might be able to withdrawal funds. But, can't you say the same thing about a credit card? Heck, you don't even need a password for that; everything you need is right on the card. Or, your mobile device (if you pay through near-field tech)?
  - tjader 3y ago
    If you need PIN or password, why are people so scared of giving out account numbers?
  - dqv 3y ago
    >With approval (eg - PIN or password) you might be able to withdrawal funds. Not to sound like someone who wants to get your bank details, but which bank allows you to delay ACH payments until you approve them? All someone needs to get money from my account is the (publicly available) routing number for my bank and my account number. Boom. Now I'm paying someone else's Verizon bill and have to call my bank and say "I can't believe you think I'm someone who would waste money with Verizon!". What I really want is access control for all ACH transactions. They said it wasn't possible for me to do an allowlist for ACH. I basically just have to call any time a fraudulent transaction comes through to stop payment. OTOH, with certain card issuers (AmEx I think?), I can simply press a button to declare a transaction fraudulent. >But, can't you say the same thing about a credit card? Heck, you don't even need a password for that; everything you need is right on the card. Checks have that too. Except there are hundreds of copies of them. Someone just needs to see one check to get all the information they need to withdraw from your account. OTOH, I turn my debit card off, so having that information is useless unless someone knows when it's on. I can actually do this with most of my cards, debit and credit. Coupled with virtual credit cards, it's a really effective way to secure money. Or at least have stricter control than a classic bank account.

dqv 3y ago

I mean take a page from cryptocurrencies [0] and allow multiple wallets. Then add on access control. Payroll is always going to want to be able to pull back from the “wallet”, but that doesn’t mean there can’t be some access control mechanism that says “only payroll can push to or pull from this wallet address”. [0]: or whatever thing one wants to say is responsible for generating the idea of multiple electronic wallets. I get that some people think crypto is dumb. Take your pick on what was responsible for this idea.

lmz 3y ago

As a non American, the idea of a bank account number being a kind of secret that is usable to pull money out of the account is the most curious thing to me. I guess something like this can only exist in a high trust environment.

paulddraper 3y ago
As an American, I am perplexed by the fill-now-pay-after European gas pumps. I suppose something like that can only exist in a high trust environment.
- blacksmith_tb 3y ago
  Not trying to wade into a continental dispute, but weren't gas pumps in the US also fill-then-pay until maybe 10-15 yr ago? I find it strange that you now have to basically guess about how much it will cost and then authorize a purchase up to that amount, instead of, you know, paying for however much actually got pumped (at today's price).
  - toasterlovin 3y ago
    You typically authorize payment with a card before pumping, then the final amount is captured by the gas station after you're done. You only have to guess the amount if you're paying cash or if the pump card reader is broken and you have to pay inside. It's the same concept as paying for a meal at a sit down restaurant: they authorize your card for the check amount plus some extra, then you write in the tip on the receipt, then the restaurant captures the correct amount later (at least, that's historically how it works, many restaurants are shifting to payment terminals where it's all done at once).
    - lmm 3y ago
      > It's the same concept as paying for a meal at a sit down restaurant: they authorize your card for the check amount plus some extra, then you write in the tip on the receipt, then the restaurant captures the correct amount later (at least, that's historically how it works, many restaurants are shifting to payment terminals where it's all done at once). You what? That's bizzare.

chrismcb 3y ago

Laws. The American banking system has to many draconian regulations coupled with "know your customer" and any money laundering laws, it makes banking difficult. And hard to disrupt

lxgr 3y ago

> your employer needs to store your account and routing number as another piece of your personal info that they can lose Having grown up with banking outside the US, even that concern seems largely bizarre to me. Bank account numbers are routing identifiers, which have no business being used as bearer tokens! To be fair, the same thing (i.e. direct debits that can be initiated using only somebody's account and routing number) is possible in many other countries as well, but usually it's only used for very low-risk payments, since reversals are usually just a click away, with no recourse for the (former) payee. > Like, the system should be that you give your employer your banks name, plus a UUID associated with your account that allows entitys to deposit but not withdraw funds for you account. That UUID is just the account number. What needs to change is being able to initiate debits from somebody's account using only the account number; being able to make credit transfers to them is usually not a problem. For example, I don't see why banks can't offer two forms of account numbers: One that's only usable for inbound payments (and automatically bounces debits of any form, whether (fraudulent) check or ACH), and one that allows debits as well, possibly even limited to a single payee.