Re:Phone numbers are not proper verification
by herbst on Monday January 16, 2017 @07:19AM
(#13409571)
As mentioned in some other comment my bank was a bad point, i see why its more relevant for banking. While one of my banks is perfectly happy with what i am doing and offers me paper TANs and contacts me via letters the other isnt.
I am more about everything else than banking tho. Things that dont have the need to contact me ASAP and still use SMS for authentification purposes. (Personally i dont even mind verification, i have a number, just not for long)
Re:Phone numbers are not proper verification
by SomeStupidPoint on Monday January 16, 2017 @08:57AM
(#13409956)
My bank emails me about suspicious transactions.
There's a link for if I authorized it and a link for if I didnt.
In fact, basically everything my bank does is by email, except a few legal documents amd sending replacement cards, which are by mail.
I cant count the number of times they called me on a single hand.
Maybe the bank is not interested in serving people like you - and why should they be? A bank needs to be able to loan money to fulfil its function - everything else they do is about enabling the loan business. To be able to make loans they need to be able to have some hope of being repaid, so they need a reliable way of contacting someone tied to that person's identity and expensive to mess with. Emails are ignorable and untraceable. Home address fulfils those functions but isn't really practical as a sole means of contact - would you like them to place suspicions transactions on hold while they send you a letter and wait for your reply?