allegedly one of the more infamous hackers of th e 80s/90s used commodore vic 20s and c64 and amiga emulation programs to hack in government servers simply because they didnt/don’t have any defenses against them
That makes no sense. The real reason to use a cheap computer to hack into government servers would be because one could not afford an expensive computer to use to hack government servers.
Paypal (first time I’ve encountered the name Zelle) is more like 1 standalone bank than a clearing system. You have a means to insert/remove your money from Paypal, just like your bank. We are all the customers.
Banks OTOH have to accept payments drawn on a different bank, and front the money - or they give it to you in the rear instead with the delay.
Option A is - they process every single transaction as a separate transaction between them and the corresponding bank. I cash the cheque, they forward it to the bank it’s drawn on, that bank replies the cheque is good (as far as they can tell, the cheque is valid and the money is in that account) and reply to the bank - “OK for now”. Try to imagine the level of traffic, and what happens if the line goes down between banks; and how many banks have to be participating.
Option B is - they consolidate all transactions between themselves and a corresponding bank, and send the bundle as a single transaction once a day or so. The their bank then responds with what it believes is the correct reconcilliation for each cheque.
Then perhaps a few days later, their customer may say “huh? I didn’t write that cheque” and the process is reversed and if the cheque casher is long gone with the money, one bank or the other is left holding the bag.
I assume the eTransfer is immediate because those who sign up for the process bypass the risk of forged chques because the transaction has to be approved by the userid of the sender; plus the sender must have the money in their account, no risk of bounces. Then the etransfer clearing house is like a separate bank that each bank (sender and receiver) process a transaction against; essentially another service like paypal or a credit card.
Trust is an essence of our system. I remember our hotel stay in Lhasa. When we checked out, the guide from the tourism company that had arranged our stay pulled out a giant wad of 100Yuan bills to pay the hotel bill, since we’d paid a consolidated tour fee to that company (by VIsa). Obviously, their economy was not yet at the point where one business billed another and waited for the cheque.
I worked for a company that did payroll deposit in the early 1970’s. Basically, they printed up a list on fanfold paper of what they were depositing to the 5 banks in the small town. This was for reference. then they transmitted a file (IBM mainframe format) to the head office, which generated a tape and took it down the street to one of Canada’s 5 big banks - who then processed the tape that night - bank (routing), brank, account and dollar amount - and distributed files to the rest of the banks the next night for deposits that did not go into their accounts. It was a long time before they accepted a file transmitted by a non-bank. (IIRC, they still didn’t even in the 2000’s; we transmitted to a special service that then submitted it. Security.
No, they cant. First of all, you have to have on line banking. Otherwise, it wont work.
Then they have to know your SSN, PIN, DoB, etc.
I worked in banking security. It isnt that easy. Of course a professional could do it, with some googling and perhaps a visit to the dark web. But the “minimum-wage cashier”? Nope. He can do that with your credit card # or your bank card and PIN.
Your tale about changing banks I am sure is true, but that is due to incompetence of your new bank.
The same information used to cash a legitimate check can be used to cash a fake check, of whatever amount the attacker likes. No further information, and almost no “hacking”, necessary.
Yes! The “check” sent as part of a promotional sales pitch. Of course the check is not good, but every so often you hear about someone actually cashing one.
The thing with fraud is not getting away with it once, it’s that to maintain yourself in style, you need to do it over and over. This is where computers help - whether it’s paper cheques or credit cards or bank transfers, it doesn’t take long to analyze a cluster of frauds and determine the common factors - this store or that restaurant (or several). From there, the next step is analyzing who had access to the compromised data based on work schedules. Wholesale actions tend to attract “loss prevention officers” fairly soon.
Also remember the fellow in the early days of bank transfer tech, who had access to the network for interbank transfers. He inserted some packets into the traffic, sent himself several million dollars, then moved it to Switzerland and bought diamonds from the Russians to get it out of the banking system. When he was caught, apparently the bank(s) resold the diamonds for a few million more than he paid. A fairly profitable enterprise, but not for him.
The question I have for the OP is what does he care whether the check has cleared the issuing bank?
At my major US bank, when I deposit a paper check the money is instantly available to withdraw. At least unless the check is gigantic.
Yes, that means my bank is taking the risk that a) maybe the paper check will later prove bad, AND b) they won’t be able to get the equivalent money back from me somehow later. It takes both those things going wrong before my bank is out any money. They’re willing to take that risk. For me and for millions of their other customers.
I suggest maybe the OP is using a crappy bank by modern US standards. Which standards, ref many posts upthread, are still majorly primitive compared to any sensible country.
Same in Canada - I assume they have a method for flagging “preferred” customers, ie. those who have done business with them reliably for a while and have financial reliability such that they can reverse a transaction if the cheque bounces. On top of that, I and many others have overdraft protection so if my account does not have sufficient funds to reverse the transaction, they put the account into overdraft and get an overdraft fee as well.
In the early days of direct deposit I mentioned previously - the bank had a print-out of the payroll deposit amounts by late Tuesday or early Wednesday, even though the deposit did not happen until Thursday night Friday morning. The local branch made a tidy profit from people who couldn’t wait and wanted some of their money Wednesday or Thursday. they’d verify from the printout and let the customer have some of their money early for a $10 fee.
AFAIK, a bank transfer can be cancelled up to two weeks after it has been made. So, the money is in your account, but it can also be removed again. The payment may be instant, depending on the banks involved but the payment is not necessarily irrevocable.
Payments within a bank (i.e. payer and payee use the same bank) can be instant during a working day. But a payment made after 22:00 on Friday won’t actually take place until Monday. In the case of my bank, when I make such a transfer at the weekend I get a message telling me that the transfer will take place at midday on Monday. Transfers between two different banks can be instant - but for an extra charge, as opposed to the normal one-day wait. Much the same applies to international transfers, but the waiting time can be a few days there, depending on the countries and banks involved.
Life got much easier in Europe with SEPA bank transfers, which can be done FREE within the Eurozone. Not sure if transfers are also free within the EU; I get transfers from Germany, in Euro, to my Euro Polish bank account.
Regarding checks, I assume you have heard of the scam involving payment by check, but for an amount exceeding the amount requested, and the person with the check sweetly asks for the balance to be refunded. The check was of course stolen and is not cleared.
For sure, nothing is irrevocable. Technically, I would assume that an instant payment would be reversed by executing a second instant payment in the opposite direction.
I would expect SEPA instant payments to be free and available 24/365, but based on what you say not every bank participates or offers them for free yet. I guess they assumed market pressures would eventually bring them to adopt it. Quick Googling reveals that RT1 went live in late 2017 and TIPS in 2018, so it hasn’t been that long yet.
Why didn’t you do a wire transfer between the accounts?
I care because once it’s cleared the issuing bank, there is no valid reason for my bank not to immediately transfer the funds into my account. The only reason they wouldn’t is if they’re holding the funds – MY funds! – in an interest-bearing account to get a few more pennies for them.
And no, I am not using a “crappy bank”. My bank has operations in several US states and other countries which is why I went with them to begin with. I really don’t think it has anything to do with any particular bank, just the overall “old-school” way of conducting banking business.
If they are not making the funds promptly available for withdrawal they ARE a crappy bank by 2020 US standards. Unless you have some unusual situation here, like the funds are coming from a foreign country, or these checks are 10s of thousands of dollars, or you just opened your account 2 weeks ago, you can do better by shopping around.
You can also try contacting them directly and asking them about their hold policy and what you might be able to do change your situation to get a more favorable funds hold duration.
For the USA, FRS Regulation CC applies. That will give you plenty of Google fodder. This chart is informative. You will notice that in no case does the date the funds are available depend on when the issuing bank clears the check. That date is irrelevant as a matter of regulation.
The last date a bank can come back to you if a check later proves bad is, IIRC, 60 days. But they are not, ref the above chart, allowed to wait anywhere near that long before giving you access to the deposited funds.
If pay for my groceries with an actual check (which some people still do) , the minimum wage cashier can use the routing and account number to either 1) print their own checks with my account information (which might require software and special ink and paper) or 2) use that information to pay for purchases/bills with an echeck - which might mean I can recover my money eventually if it’s used to pay the cashier’s college tuition bill , but the money will be gone for a while. Some places that accept echecks only require the name on the account, the account and routing numbers and possibly the address- all of which commonly appear on checks.
So, no, he cant just use echeck.
So, no he cant just print his own checks.
Look, I worked bank fraud for now over a decade. neither of what you claim was by any way common. It simply didnt happy. Counterfeit cashiers checks- yes. Stealing CC #- common. Stealing back card info and PINs- also common.
I read that whole article, and I don’t see why the cashier couldn’t use echeck. Because as far as the article is concerned , this is the authentication process:
The acceptance service compares the provided client information (for example, first name, last name, and address) to what the issuing bank has on file for the account and confirms it matches. If it doesn’t, the payment is declined. The eCheck authentication process ensures you don’t receive fraudulent payment information and that only authorized individuals are using an account.
which is no different than what I said
Some places that accept echecks only require the name on the account, the account and routing numbers and possibly the address- all of which commonly appear on checks.
And I wasn’t talking about ordering checks from a check printer : I was talking about something like
I never said it was common - just that paying for groceries with a check gave the cashier all the information needed to do it.
why would you authorize a bad check?
I’m not sure what you mean, but assuming you’re talking about the echeck process- how does anyone know that the echeck with my account details wasn’t authorized by me before I notify the bank and close the account? I used to pay my kids’ tuition bills ( in their names) with echecks on my account all the time.
Don’t these methods generally charge a fee, either to the sender or the receiver? (I am genuinely asking, as I am not sure). If that is the case, I can see why some people might find the economic model of checks preferable.
Also, in certain cases the physical nature of checks benefits the sender as well as the bank. Some of us remember “floating” a check today into the mail when we wouldn’t have funds to cover it until tomorrow (or later). Until a few months ago, I was receiving checks every month on a house that my father was selling on a private contract, which I then inherited. I offered to to give the buyer my bank information so that he could deposit the funds directly, but he wasn’t interested. I suspect that in addition to using the float, he was computer illiterate.
So there’s always some kind of reason.