Live data from Hacker News

“Privacy”.com–Yeah Right

ersei.net

1–10 of 172 posts

Re: “Privacy”.com–Yeah Right

#2
The use of third party KYC services like Onfido is widespread in the cryptocurrency space as well, where over-compliance is the norm right now. Consumers are given little choice as to which provider stewards their ID scans, bank statements, biometric data, etc.

This user experience has trained the most vulnerable, non-tech-savvy audiences to provide just about anything requested when asked for ID verification. Including to phishers.

If you push back too hard against arbitrary, invasive KYC requests, you start down a path towards becoming unbanked.

The USA is badly in need of modern consumer privacy regulations.

Re: “Privacy”.com–Yeah Right

#3
Privacy.com is not about hiding your identity from authorities.

It's mostly about hiding the fact that the same person, you, are paying to merchant A and merchant B. It allows you to easily have a card per merchant, and lock it to the merchant so that when its number is stolen, it can't be used anywhere else.

The domain name is a bit lofty, yes.

Re: “Privacy”.com–Yeah Right

#4

The use of third party KYC services like Onfido is widespread in the cryptocurrency space as well, where over-compliance is the norm right now. Consumers are given little choice as to which provider stewards their ID scans, bank statements, biometric data, etc. This user experience has trained the most vulnerable, non-tech-savvy audiences to provide just about anything requested when asked for ID verification. Includ…

If you think this one is bad: look at Plaid, which literally phishes users bank credentials as "fintech".

Re: “Privacy”.com–Yeah Right

#6

The use of third party KYC services like Onfido is widespread in the cryptocurrency space as well, where over-compliance is the norm right now. Consumers are given little choice as to which provider stewards their ID scans, bank statements, biometric data, etc. This user experience has trained the most vulnerable, non-tech-savvy audiences to provide just about anything requested when asked for ID verification. Includ…

If you think this one is bad: look at Plaid, which literally phishes users bank credentials as "fintech".

“Phishing” implies fraudulent deception.

Re: “Privacy”.com–Yeah Right

#7
post #3

Privacy.com is not about hiding your identity from authorities. It's mostly about hiding the fact that the same person, you, are paying to merchant A and merchant B. It allows you to easily have a card per merchant, and lock it to the merchant so that when its number is stolen, it can't be used anywhere else. The domain name is a bit lofty, yes.

The name is doublespeak and not concerned with privacy as an ideal, it's really just to manage CCs in a sane way, like using a CC once and then disposing of it so you don't get unexpected charges. Also it limits the blast radius if a vendor gets breached and your legal name is not exposed. (So you need to sacrifice your privacy to privacy.com to get privacy on other vendors). They need to rebrand as 'SaneCard' or something similar.

Re: “Privacy”.com–Yeah Right

#8
post #3

Privacy.com is not about hiding your identity from authorities. It's mostly about hiding the fact that the same person, you, are paying to merchant A and merchant B. It allows you to easily have a card per merchant, and lock it to the merchant so that when its number is stolen, it can't be used anywhere else. The domain name is a bit lofty, yes.

Author here.

My concern wasn't that Privacy.com knows who is using their service, but with rather how they choose to know that information through a third party (Onfido) and how terrible Onfido's privacy policy is.

Re: “Privacy”.com–Yeah Right

#10
post #5

Privacy.com was a perfect expression of “Your business is our feature”. Practically every major card issuer provides native virtual numbers now.

How does one go about getting such numbers? Do a web search for "$BANK_NAME virtual credit card number"?
Post reply on HN