Hacker News Reader

Comment by kevin_thibedeau | Hacker News Reader

For the better since ACH is woefully insecure.

Tbh there isn't much security in SEPA either. The only reason SEPA Debit Fraud is rare is because A) it requires you having a bank account with a verified address and business registration and B) the bank is liable if the vendor goes fraudstering. The bank gets the money from the fraudster or they loose it.

You can also easily block or reverse transfers either in general or for specific merchants including down to blocking only weekly payments under 50€ from vendor X if you want to be really specific.

Secure enough to process $50 trillion in 2018.

> Secure enough to process $50 trillion in 2018.

How is that any indication of its security?

It is an existence proof that the security is good enough to get the job done and keep losses to an acceptable level. If it was truly "woeful" enough to actually matter then an alternative with better security would have displaced it by now.

This is overly simplistic and assumes an open market witn no barrier to entry for competitors, which is not the case.

It’s like saying the people of North Korea believe their government is good enough to get the job done, otherwise KJU would have been displaced by now.

It is a high indication of many people considering it secure enough (for their respective business case)

If I produced applications with that level of security, i would be unemployed.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com