Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Banks hit with millions in fines for using Signal and WhatsApp

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 247 posts

Re: Banks hit with millions in fines for using Signal and WhatsApp

#111

Post by dahfizz »

gmd63 wrote: post #109
dahfizz wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using WhatApp is not a "crime". There were no laws broken. This is just some regulators giving out fines because they can't spy on employee's private messages. If bureaucrats were on my ass about something so stupid, I would be very pleased once the matter was resolved.

It's a rule that upon being broken allows the SEC to fine you, which is why they are paying a bunch of money. Are you saying that we should not be able to require banks of a certain size to keep records, so that the highway patrol officers of finance can economically pull you over when you're speeding? Or should we allow everyone to use fuzzbusters effectively making the law pointless?

> Are you saying that we should not be able to require banks of a certain size to keep records

No. I'm saying this is just some boring, annoying regulation, and your grandstanding about wanting people to feel bad about breaking laws is misguided.

Re: Banks hit with millions in fines for using Signal and WhatsApp

#112

Post by bryan_w »

prmoustache wrote: post #107
bryan_w wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Consider the following: You encrypt and upload the media to the storage server. You share the download URL and key with person #1 Now how long would it take to forward that same message with the url and key to person #2...n?

Are you saying they would be using symmetric encryption?

Not necessarily, sender generates a private key for the piece of media, and shares the public key for that media item along with the download location to person 1&2 over their encrypted chat channels.

Re: Banks hit with millions in fines for using Signal and WhatsApp

#113

Post by dreamcompiler »

At this point I cannot understand why anybody would use Wells Fargo as their bank. WF has proven repeatedly that they are pretty much the opposite of what everybody thinks a good bank should be. Repeated law violations; repeated screwing-over of their customers. Why are they still in business?

Re: Banks hit with millions in fines for using Signal and WhatsApp

#114

Post by Sunspark »

edmundsauto wrote: post #29
Sunspark wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Such a waste of time trying intently to regulate and control communication. People will just get a second private device that is not managed by the organization, and if there is a mutually beneficial advantage to doing so, the other party will do the same as well. This has been going on forever, I remember when they kicked up a huge fuss when they found out that people were doing direct pin-to-pin messages on the bla…

It’s actually a bit of a trap - if you are caught using secondary devices, it speaks to intent. Similarly, when you deposit money at a bank and they ask you to certify these are not proceeds of a crime: they aren’t expecting to catch people at that step. But if they catch you later, boom you defrauded a bank by lying and have additional charges.

It's not illegal to own a personal device, it's also not illegal to be friends with your coworkers if you trust them.

There is no "intent" here. What you are describing is an organized criminal conspiracy which is illegal no matter what device or system you're using. What I am talking about here is whether the employer should get to listen in to all your calls and read all your emails and text messages. Why do you think they like BYOD so much? Because they can get a window into your personal life, what apps you have installed, etc.

Re: Banks hit with millions in fines for using Signal and WhatsApp

#116

Post by WarOnPrivacy »

ikue wrote: post #88
richbell wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That makes sense. The title character limit seems to be a cause of frequent confusion.

It does and the limit makes it come off as clickbait-y which I don't like.

Personally, I sympathize. Rewriting headlines here (when necessary) can be tough; it isn't a given that the optimal one will reveal itself.

Re: Banks hit with millions in fines for using Signal and WhatsApp

#117

Post by jermaustin1 »

dreamcompiler wrote: post #113

At this point I cannot understand why anybody would use Wells Fargo as their bank. WF has proven repeatedly that they are pretty much the opposite of what everybody thinks a good bank should be. Repeated law violations; repeated screwing-over of their customers. Why are they still in business?

As a WF customer... its lock-in. The amount of work I would need to do to switch banks thanks to bill pay, auto-drafts, etc, is not worth the headache.

Re: Banks hit with millions in fines for using Signal and WhatsApp

#118

Post by pessimizer »

enterthematrix wrote: post #65

This headline is clickbait. The issue is banks not preserving records, something that the rules are ABUNDANTLY clear on.

The headline isn't clickbait enough. Banks are using encrypted messaging to avoid leaving evidence.

Re: Banks hit with millions in fines for using Signal and WhatsApp

#119

Post by H4lcyon »

dreamcompiler wrote: post #113

At this point I cannot understand why anybody would use Wells Fargo as their bank. WF has proven repeatedly that they are pretty much the opposite of what everybody thinks a good bank should be. Repeated law violations; repeated screwing-over of their customers. Why are they still in business?

IMO it is in your best interest to not use banks at all for personal finances, WF is just the most glaring exemplar of why not to. A better alternative are credit unions which are non-profit organizations set up to benefit their members. Strange to think about, but depositors are a liability to banks. Unless you're taking a loan from the bank you are not really a "customer" in their eyes.

Re: Banks hit with millions in fines for using Signal and WhatsApp

#120

Post by kolbe »

psychphysic wrote: post #93
ikue wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had a problem with including the full headline because only so many characters could be used in the title of the post.

You could have used "Banks fined millions evading regulation with Signal & WhatsApp" News headlines have rules they use to make for shorter sentences. They'd probably write "Banks fined millions, delete records, use E2E apps"

Here's a link to the actual press release: https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2023-149

It makes no mention of evading regulation. This fine is for a failure to retain written communications. Which is impossible to do for some of these communications channels.

Post reply on HN