Most of the time, it's the bank that's on the hook for fraud, which is why they're motivated not to trust that the user's device is sufficiently secure.

▲

Gigachad 10 hours ago | parent [-]

There’s no world where the bank is on the hook for fraud while also not being allowed to prevent it.

Personally I’m ok with the bank being on the hook and their app checking there isn’t malware loaded on the OS. I have my raspberry pi and steam deck for full modding without intermingling it with extremely sensitive computing.

▲

lan321 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Is this not a solved problem? I used to have a TAN generator for my bank as a separate device I paid like 5 euros for. If you get provided an authenticator and get forced to use it for transfers essentially even if my device is compromised it doesn't matter unless their device also gets compromised. They are then free to lock it as much as they want.

▲

Gigachad 5 hours ago | parent [-]

If it’s just one of those 2FA code generators, that still won’t help if your phone has malware on it. The malware can just modify the transfer as you are making it and have typed in the code.

Users would also lose them far more than they lose their phones.

	▲	robinsonb5 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I have one of those 2FA code generators, and used to have a different one with a business account, too. In both cases the authorisation challenge/response involves part of the destination account number, so if the details are tampered with by malware the code won't work.

▲

10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

beeflet 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I'm not okay with owning a cuck device where the bank manages my OS. So we have a problem.

	▲	b_e_n_t_o_n 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		We? or you :P

▲

antisol 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

lolwut

define "malware".