Why are my gaming accounts more secure than my financial accounts?

reddit.com

24 points·haunter··6 comments

Cuz Gam Gam needs to be able to use basic online banking, she's never going to be able to use 2fa.

Also Gam Gam will call up the support hotline, will have no problem taking up 2h of an employee's time, and if that doesn't work, will just take her $800k retirement account to another bank.

I would guess most banks survive on institutional momentum and regulatory preference towards cemented companies rather than providing quality service. I was once told by a security person in the banking industry that they were in the business of making money, not security.

But wouldn't then gaming companies be in the business of making money from people playing games? Not in security.

I think it's more so because banks have significant consequences if they take their customers offline all at once, when compared with gamers. Therefore improvements to security carry a higher level of risk when compared to gaming companies. Changes to the environments need to be more carefully thought out given your customer base ranges from 16 year old tech literate's to 80 year olds with no technical knowledge.

It's only how that banks are (in Australia e.g.) having to meet stringent requirements information security requirements which carry financial penalties which has moved the dial. Because it's no longer a nice to have, but a must have in order to do business.

Because the people most likely to be stumped by 2FA are the people most likely to bring in lucrative overdraft, credit card and loan fees.

A (claimed) ex-banker is in the thread, and the response is so telling. It's because it would cost them money and the bank isn't liable for losses that would be prevented by it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com