You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
11 points

I take your point, and I’m sure you’re right about the banks’ rationale, but in my own view it does not seem like it should be the banks’ decision to make.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

As soon as a bank offers any sort of fraud protection, though, security becomes a bank issue (in addition to a “you” issue).

Not at all saying I agree with the banks on this, but I think that may be part of the thinking.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

This is a good point. The bank needs to do as much as they can to reduce fraud risk, and they’ve probably found some correlation between rooted phones and a higher likelihood of fraudulent transactions. Some banks block VPNs for a similar reason - when logging in from a VPN, it’s harder for them to tell that it’s actually you vs if it’s an attacker that uses the same VPN service as you.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Your risk exposure is that you could lose your bank account balance. The banks risk exposure is that they could lose every bank account balance exploited by the same rooted phone vulnerability. So they evaluate risk differently than you do.

permalink
report
parent
reply

linuxmemes

!linuxmemes@lemmy.world

Create post

I use Arch btw


Sister communities:
Community rules
  1. Follow the site-wide rules and code of conduct
  2. Be civil
  3. Post Linux-related content
  4. No recent reposts

Please report posts and comments that break these rules!

Community stats

  • 7.6K

    Monthly active users

  • 1.2K

    Posts

  • 68K

    Comments