> Why is that insane? It's inelegant, but it's not functionally different than having an API and a system for registering API keys.
Because there is such thing as a read-only API. But logging into the banking site as a customer permits the aggregator to take actions as the customer, like wire transfers--which are not reversible, and not typically covered by fraud protection.
Sure, I might trust Mint not to do that, but what if Mint gets hacked? By definition, Mint can access my bank creds in plain text, since it must paste them into my bank's website. That is worse security than even my own bank's website, which undoubtedly stores only the hash of my password.
My bank is not going to indemnify me for fraud caused by Mint's security problems. Bank agreements usually say "don't share your account creds," so if you do, and then lose your money, the bank is not likely to make you whole.