i worked on a large platform (YC company, too!) previously on their 2FA implementation. while not ideal, it was decided to keep SMS 2FA because there are still people out there without smart phones or in general the ability to do TOTP. but they still have some means to access the site that wasn't a smartphone i guess. so, it's a bit of a compatibility issue, i guess there will be some portion of the population who wi…
Why are banks still getting authentication so wrong?
151–160 of 375 posts
Re: Why are banks still getting authentication so wrong?
#152Also, they still expect you to authenticate when they phone you. No, I'm not going to tell you my birthday when you phone me. No wonder so many people get scammed, when banks are training people on how to get scammed.
The complete lack of ANY kind of security, usability, and reference-ability in telephones and the continued use of them as the default communication method in business is absolutely fucking baffling to me. It's literally the worst communication method for anything: It requires verbal back and forth between two parties that's entirely dependent on your hearing the other person, with built in opportunities for misheari…
Re: Why are banks still getting authentication so wrong?
#153Earlier quoted context omitted.
Federal government or governmemts in general? As far as I get, driver licenses are doing in US what id cards are doing in Europe and are issued by governments too.
In the US you don't need to have any form of ID. Your life will be very difficult, but you don't legally need it. ID is an optional service here.
Re: Why are banks still getting authentication so wrong?
#154Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the U.S., identity providing is not a role the government fills. Not everyone has to have a passport, for example. A passport is merely a purpose-specific tool for crossing borders, not general identity.
And it is a significant flaw of the US model!
Re: Why are banks still getting authentication so wrong?
#155Broadly speaking: because they don't have to get it right. Banks are generally protected from fraud not by up-front security, but by auditing. If someone mis-applies funds, they have a chain of transactions they can back out. And, if someone does it maliciously, they have a disproportionate support of the force of law to discourage such behavior. Contrast most software companies, where theft of data is not a reversib…
While not wrong it will big a big hasstle for whoever is the fraud victum while things are reversed. You may even lose other things in your life because you are unable to pay bills you technically have the money for but cannot access the money.
The financial sector has sheltered itself / been sheltered from the immediate consequences of fraud perpetrated upon it regarding its customers. The customers catch most of the consequences in terms of opportunity costs and some of the bookkeeping labor.
(... in the large, of course, too much fraud runs the bank out of customers and then the bank suffers. But that has to be a lot of fraud, and that's where the governmental big stick that the banks and other financial operators get to wield by proxy come back into play. Try to steal $100 via credit card fraud and you probably get away with it [once], with the cost being borne by a credit card company having to write off couch-cushion money and an individual consumer being heinously inconvenienced in having to rotate all their auto-deduction numbers. Try to steal $1,000,000? The FBI has some questions, friend, if you'd be willing to come with these nice men down to the branch office).
Re: Why are banks still getting authentication so wrong?
#156Earlier quoted context omitted.
Zurich Kantonalbank (ZKB) has a very similar system, probably because they're also a big bank in Switzerland
think its a Europe thing, we have the same solution in Denmark. Chip and Pin has been in Europe forever I don't think the US has moved to this yet (although happy to be wrong) and also believe they still like those bouncy checks that has sort of died elsewhere.
Re: Why are banks still getting authentication so wrong?
#157Authentication, insofar as making sure that only signatories on the account can access it and debit/credit from it, is something you have to pay someone something to do, and not something that those in charge of the bank really understand.
If someone does breach an account, it's incredibly difficult to pin on the bank.
If you are unlikely to face a financial penalty for a failure, you don't work to avoid the failure.
I had an e-checking account broken into a few years back. Someone in Atlanta wrote themselves a check for $9k, and it didn't even come close to matching my signature. I'm in Kansas City. I have never been to Atlanta in my life, nor do I regularly do business with anyone in Atlanta. I didn't find out until the next week. It was on me to file a police report and do all of the mitigation. I was reimbursed, but I don't know how the bank came up with that money, maybe they carry insurance for this sort of thing? In order to resume use of online banking, the 1337 h4x0rz in their security department made me do a virus scan of my devices. It's still 2005 there.
There are several obvious things that they could have done - signature comparison using OCR, warnings about unusual logins, warnings about checks being written outside of the usual geographic area I do business in - that they just don't do. If it's obvious and they don't do it, it's because they aren't losing money for this.
Re: Why are banks still getting authentication so wrong?
#158Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the U.S., identity providing is not a role the government fills. Not everyone has to have a passport, for example. A passport is merely a purpose-specific tool for crossing borders, not general identity.
You have plenty of government id's in the US as well. Driver licenses, tax number, birth certificates ... I think often people mess up the subjects of privacy, freedom and a government provided id. You can have privacy and freedom even if you have a government issued id. And you can have your privacy and freedom taken away from you without the government giving you standardized way of proving your id.
People might be more amenable if SSO wasn’t implemented as these stupid OIDC flows where the govt gets to know every time you login to your bank and what IP you’re using, etc.
Re: Why are banks still getting authentication so wrong?
#159OP's problem sounds like failure to plan. If you are going to suspend your cell plan, you should probably check your authenticator works or have a backup option before you travel to another country. I don't know what the viable alternative is. Passkeys have just as many issues when phones are stolen, lost or broken. You cannot expect consumers to store recovery codes. I do agree support of TOTP authenticators would h…
hardware tokens are the way! Everyone has had a house key their whole lives, and understands how to keep a spare to prevent lock-outs.
Re: Why are banks still getting authentication so wrong?
#160Earlier quoted context omitted.
I had someone ask for my name. I told them my first and last name. They said it wasn't correct. After a few minutes of discussion, it turns out the person wanted my name as it appeared on my card , which is first name, middle initial, last name and a suffix. I told the person as feedback that what they asked for and what they wanted were two different things. I'm not optimistic that anything will change.
It will improve once we have AI smarter than agents who work for the wages banks pay for this. The weakness is in the processes and the lack of critical thinking skills of people executing processes.