Identity Verification / Authentication - Device Dependent.

ranciduk

I was in the same boat up until recently 

got an new Alcatel smart phone off amazon for just £50

Decent enough, does the job and costs a fraction of an iPhone etc 

got to be done!

pafpcg

I appreciate that for many people using a smartphone is convenient and effective. 

What worries me is the apparent attitude that use of a smartphone should become compulsory - it's the policy of several mainstream financial institutions based on the assumption that everyone has access to their own personal smartphone.  But what about people who just cannot use a smartphone?  My partner has arthritis in her fingers and failing eyesight making it difficult to read tiny text on a small screen and near impossible to enter data!

We're not all blessed with 20/20 vision and manual dexterity - the disability legislation was enacted for a reason...

scoot65

I use online banking and have the passcode text to my smartphone. I'd rather see my accounts fullscreen on my laptop rather than a small smartphone screen.

Regarding security, can someone explain how banking by an app is more secure than banking online. I know it's something to do with hacking, but not sure of the details..... 

Eco_Miser

scoot65 said:

I use

Regarding security, can someone explain how banking by an app is more secure than banking online. I know it's something to do with hacking, but not sure of the details..... 

I'd be interested in the details too, but the short answer is the bank controls the app (it was written to their spec.), it doesn't control your browser.

Albermarle

An added point is that it is apparently safer generally to access the internet via a 4G signal than by wi fi , especially in public places .

molerat

My SIL was in a similar situation re her tax account and I remotely verified her without the aid of a smartphone.  Do you not have a passport or photo driving licence ?

Eco_Miser

Albermarle said:

An added point is that it is apparently safer generally to access the internet via a 4G signal than by wi fi , especially in public places .

Certainly public wifi traffic can be hacked by whoever is controlling it, if anything is passed unencrypted, but your home wifi should be reasonably safe.

I use wired LAN and desktop, that way only the ISP and super-hackers have a chance.

scoot65

Thanks for the replies guys. Much appreciated!

PRAISETHESUN

The whole point of multi-factor authentication is that there are multiple "factors" to authenticate yourself as the owner of your  account - something you "know" (eg. a password), something you have (eg. a card reader/a smartphone app) and something you are (eg. biometrics). Using at least two of these "factors" greatly increases security, as it's unlikely a criminal would have enough of the required factors to impersonate you. In a world of ever increasing online threats, banks and other organisations are only going to implement more and more security, which personally I think is a good thing. There's usually multiple avenues to implement this and different organisations do so differently, so if your current bank doesn't offer something that works for you then you can always check out their competitors and see what they offer instead.

I agree with the OP and their concern about "device-dependence" though. The problem is that any backup option you leave in for people who legitimately need it is also a hole someone can exploit. Using the SMS example - yes if you lose your phone you can contact your mobile provider and request a new SIM, but that same vector has been used by criminals who call up and impersonate the account owner to get their SIM, which now gets all the security codes for someone's online accounts. A banking app on a single phone is more secure in that respect, as it's harder to get unauthorised access to, but relies on the owner not losing their phone while down at the pub or something. Still, with more security the likelihood of unauthorised access greatly decreases so on balance most organisations are happy to make that trade off to protect themselves (which has the added bonus of helping customers as well I guess). 

etienneg

Albermarle said:

An added point is that it is apparently safer generally to access the internet via a 4G signal than by wi fi , especially in public places .

I don't think this is a good argument in favour of smartphones. Firstly, whilst public wi-fi may be less secure, encrypted wi-fi isn't. Secondly, many smartphones now have the ability to connect via wi-fi in addition to, or rather than, 4G (or other mobile signal such as 5G or 3G) anyway, a facility that is necessary in areas where the mobile phone signal is very poor or non-existent. My phone is set to use wi-fi when available in preference to 4G. I do not connect to public wi-fi, however.