5 ms·
So you're going with a slippery slope argument? This thing could cause that thing that could cause that bad thing, so this thing is bad? I suppose that is somet
by jamesaguilar 13y ago
So you're going with a slippery slope argument? This thing could cause that thing that could cause that bad thing, so this thing is bad? I suppose that is something that could happen in the future. It's not a likely problem to complain about with this particular implementation.
- 001sky 13y agoSince they'd reverse the charges anyway... You're baselessly asserting your position, though. If you write your pin on your ATM card, they will not refund you. That is policy and they ask everytime you lose your card. The bank views this as lack of due care. Likewise, if you leave copies of your fingerprints on your payment device, they could argue that you are likewise acting with un-reasonable care. Now that this has been (so easily?) spoofed, is it reasonable to believe it is secure? That is a valid concern. Unlike a pin, you cannot reset a fingerprint security mechanism. So when it is compromised, it is over. So, the result is messy in that it puts you in a problem using today's standard practices, but at the same time, the standard practice "defense" is not applicable, and lacks an obvious alternative. This is not a strawman, its a legitimate edge case.
- jamespo 13y agoThe bank has never asked me if I had my PIN written on my card when I've lost it... all they ask is lost or stolen.
- 001sky 13y agoFrom a sample card-holder's agreement: 3. I will hold in strict confidence my personal identification number (PIN). I will take reasonable precautions to keep my PIN separate from my ATM card and to prevent the unauthorized disclosure of my PIN. So, you sign an affadavit verifying you did not contravence this agreement. They will screen for this as/if you file a claim for fraud.