6 ms·

Am I missing something? They're asking for the keys to my bank account -- my username and password for online banking, something that should never be given out

by dreish 17y ago

Am I missing something? They're asking for the keys to my bank account -- my username and password for online banking, something that should never be given out to anyone under any circumstances. That, to me, is an issue I just can't get past, no matter how many people sing their praises.

staticshock 17y ago
You're not missing anything, it's just a matter of trust. There are a lot of middlemen between you and your money, no matter the scenario. For online banking, these middlemen include the browser, your OS, and the underlying communication network. You have developed a trust relationship with those components. Mint wants to be another middleman, and that's why they're developing a brand known for security and trustworthiness.
- tectonic 17y ago
  And if they get hacked and my password is abused to steal money from my account, will my bank cover the liability? I doubt it - I gave my password away. I assume it's like a stolen ATM PIN, I eat the loss. No thanks.
  - ryanwaggoner 17y ago
    Actually, your bank is required by law to limit your liability to $50 if reported within 2 days, or to $500 if reported within 60 days. Many states are even more friendly towards consumers, and some banks have voluntarily made their policies more consumer-friendly than that, limiting liability to $50 in all cases, for example. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_E http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_E
asb 17y ago
This is a problem at the moment, but I can see no reason why you shouldn't have a read-only account to give to services like this. Also, many UK banks (and I understand most banks on the continent) offer two-factor authentication for online transactions.
ryanwaggoner 17y ago
This may not be enough to sway you, but your liability is limited under Federal law: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_E http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_E

by dreish 17y ago

staticshock 17y ago

You're not missing anything, it's just a matter of trust. There are a lot of middlemen between you and your money, no matter the scenario. For online banking, these middlemen include the browser, your OS, and the underlying communication network. You have developed a trust relationship with those components. Mint wants to be another middleman, and that's why they're developing a brand known for security and trustworthiness.

tectonic 17y ago
And if they get hacked and my password is abused to steal money from my account, will my bank cover the liability? I doubt it - I gave my password away. I assume it's like a stolen ATM PIN, I eat the loss. No thanks.
- ryanwaggoner 17y ago
  Actually, your bank is required by law to limit your liability to $50 if reported within 2 days, or to $500 if reported within 60 days. Many states are even more friendly towards consumers, and some banks have voluntarily made their policies more consumer-friendly than that, limiting liability to $50 in all cases, for example. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_E http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_E

asb 17y ago

This is a problem at the moment, but I can see no reason why you shouldn't have a read-only account to give to services like this. Also, many UK banks (and I understand most banks on the continent) offer two-factor authentication for online transactions.

ryanwaggoner 17y ago

This may not be enough to sway you, but your liability is limited under Federal law: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_E http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_E