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

211–220 of 247 posts

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

#211

Post by alx__ »

monkeywork wrote: post #208
alx__ wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a pretty weak excuse. It's not hard to keep your work comms in the approved software. I would tell people to fuck off if they wanted to invade my personal device with work chatter. Boundaries are good

great - however you are one person, the large banks involved here have staff of a few hundred thousand each across several countries and with various backgrounds and norms, many who are also friends and have contact with each other outside of office hours. I agree, one needs to keep work comms on approved software, I'm simply stating that while it's fun to be like "oohh big bad bank was hiding secret convos" it was m…

Literally the only reason to use Signal is to talk about unionizing, drugs, or shady biz deals.

Texting your coworker, would the usual path, not some secondary software that requires both people to set up ahead of time.

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

#212

Post by dieselgate »

donatj wrote: post #157
clairity wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

now that physical branches are not really a differentiator of big banks, a couple hours of your time spread out over a couple months is totally worth the switch to a credit union in lower fees, better service, and supporting a more local economy. it's completely, undeniably worth it. unless you're a real big shot (worth millions in assets to the bank) who doesn't have to deal with the dehumanizing aspects of corporat…

FWIW the handful of times I've dealt with WF customer service they've been helpful and friendly solving my problems easily. My credit union on the other hand could not understand why I wouldn't give them my card number over the phone when they called me .

I don’t think the issue is their customer service not being helpful it’s just that the bank is so predatory. Things like high fees ($10/month) for checking accounts being below a threshold or opening up bogus accounts for people.

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

#213

Post by Terr_ »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #204
mvdtnz wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see a downside to expanding the record keeping requirements. Record keeping is easier than ever and frankly banks haven't proven themselves worthy of our trust. Sounds great to me.

I assume being able to have face to face off the record conversations providing plausible deniability to participants is one of the big reasons finance and other related businesses like to be in Manhattan.

Perhaps also a factor in why some managers prefer to manage employees in-person rather than remotely.

When it comes to avoiding the record, it doesn't have to be lofty corrupt/ish deals or schemes, but also cases like certain anti-union threats, or even plain personal power-tripping.

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

#214

Post by hsjqllzlfkf »

betaby wrote: post #185
hsjqllzlfkf wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Presumably telephone calls, zoom calls and in person meetings aren't recorded? Why do you presume that? Where I work every call is recorded.

How much data is that? Where it's stored? How's that achieved for the company provided IPhones?

What do iPhones have to do with this?

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

#216

Post by michaelnik »

Sunspark wrote: post #8
polygamous_bat wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AFAIK you are allowed to use any channel as long as you preserve records of the conversation. However, meeting the standards for preservation is quite difficult, which is why employees of financial institutions are generally told not to communicate outside person-to-person, or channels vetted by their company (and lawyers thereof).

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 is actually prohibited to use private devices (on the trading floor).

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

#217

Post by shapefrog »

dp-hackernews wrote: post #151
macspoofing wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Correct. Neither Signal nor WhatsApp is integrated into any corporate messaging system, so the communication flowing through those apps, is neither archived nor discoverable.

How does that differ from a simple SMS message - afaik SMS isn't integrated in any corporate messaging system either...

SMS is integrated in to the corporate messaging system on work mobile phones at banks (+ all calls recorded).

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

#218

Post by projektfu »

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?

For personal banking, I agree, there's not a lot to recommend them. I use a credit union.

For businesses, they might have the most attractive product and so you go with them. For example, they have an entire practice finance department that lends on favorable terms without SBA fees. However, they require using their checking account as a term of the loan. You could just fund the account and leave it, or use it.

The worst thing that has happened to me with them was they once allowed someone to cash a fake check using my account number. They put the money back but closed the account and I had to change over all my stuff to a new account number. I was a little disturbed that they didn't check the name on the account to the account number before approving the check.

But all of the other horror stories seem to happen on the consumer side.

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

#220

Post by red-iron-pine »

Terr_ wrote: post #213
lotsofpulp wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume being able to have face to face off the record conversations providing plausible deniability to participants is one of the big reasons finance and other related businesses like to be in Manhattan.

Perhaps also a factor in why some managers prefer to manage employees in-person rather than remotely. When it comes to avoiding the record, it doesn't have to be lofty corrupt/ish deals or schemes, but also cases like certain anti-union threats, or even plain personal power-tripping.

definitely a factor.

e.g. the C-level one-liner email that consists of "lets have a chat about this"

doesn't even have to be anything malicious, such as not wanting to socialize an idea until it's fully-baked or hiring for a new VP role

Post reply on HN