Australia avoided recession during the 2008 Global Financial Collapse (or GFC, as it is accurately titled in Australia and NZ), because the big banks did not fail, and because the Rudd government sent every taxpayer a cheque for $1000 - some of which was spent on Apple products (at least in my family). That said this does look like a big cartel clutching at legal straws in an attempt to smash Apple's deal with ANZ and Amex.
People often misunderstood that Apple Pay is only NFC chip. What Apple protect here is their implementation of transaction or surprise, consumer's security. If you read how Apple Pay works, Apple has no access to transaction whatsover. Bank still keeping the controls of all transaction and tokenization. Apple simply play as a conduit, but a very secure conduit, compare to Samsung Pay. Which is why I stated, by giving away that particular control to bank, Apple is jeopardizing consumer's security, not something that Apple design Apple Pay for.
The consumer security is not jeopardized when the control is given to the bank, your statement is plain BS.
The moment it would become known that a bank is taken security not as seriously as it should, the customer would lose the trust in the bank and would redraw all his money from the bank. Despite their commercial tactics, we all hate, we do trust banks
The don't want to use Apple Pay, they want to use the NFC. Apple pay is Apple Pay. It's not the Apple chip as Apple doesn't have exclusive rights to it because it's a standard NFC. It's also not Apple Pay token tech as all NFC payment's use the same standard token tech.
I'm not siding with the banks here but you're making it sound as if Apple owns all rights to the NFC payment's token tech, which they do not.
Apple, whatever fingers it may want to have in the pie, is still providing the most secure solution for it's customers. I'll take that over whatever service Australia's banks want to push onto me.
My bank is offering financial service since 1945, Apple started 2 years ago The financial services of my bank are audited yearly by an independent organization, Apple isn't I take me 15 minutes to get an appointment with a bank representative, I cannot get an appointment with someone from Apple All the data of my bank is stored in a national data center, Apple stores its data in a foreign data center, If have a dispute with Apple, I have no chance to access my data and to prove I am right My bank supports heavily open standards, Apple has a closed iOS ecosystem My bank is expensive. Apple is expensive
And you want me to believe that Apple is a more trustworthy partner than my bank. You must be kidding
People often misunderstood that Apple Pay is only NFC chip. What Apple protect here is their implementation of transaction or surprise, consumer's security. If you read how Apple Pay works, Apple has no access to transaction whatsover. Bank still keeping the controls of all transaction and tokenization. Apple simply play as a conduit, but a very secure conduit, compare to Samsung Pay. Which is why I stated, by giving away that particular control to bank, Apple is jeopardizing consumer's security, not something that Apple design Apple Pay for.
The consumer security is not jeopardized when the control is given to the bank, your statement is plain BS.
The moment it would become known that a bank is taken security not as seriously as it should, the customer would lose the trust in the bank and would redraw all his money from the bank. Despite their commercial tactics, we all hate, we do trust banks
To give banks some control over the NFC chip jeopardizes security no matter what the banks do, simply because the NFC access implementation on iOS/iPhone will have to be opened up to apps through public APIs, which gives more possible points of failure, more ways to gain access to sensitive data.
Apple, whatever fingers it may want to have in the pie, is still providing the most secure solution for it's customers. I'll take that over whatever service Australia's banks want to push onto me.
My bank is offering financial service since 1945, Apple started 2 years ago The financial services of my bank are audited yearly by an independent organization, Apple isn't I take me 15 minutes to get an appointment with a bank representative, I cannot get an appointment with someone from Apple All the data of my bank is stored in a national data center, Apple stores its data in a foreign data center, If have a dispute with Apple, I have no chance to access my data and to prove I am right My bank supports heavily open standards, Apple has a closed iOS ecosystem My bank is expensive. Apple is expensive
And you want me to believe that Apple is a more trustworthy partner than my bank. You must be kidding
I am an Aussie and an Apple user. In Australia Samsung users have the option of using the Banks' contactless system through NFC or using Samsung Pay. Apple users have the option of neither of these (unless with ANZ) because Apple won't let the banks access the NFC (which is standard practice everywhere else) or demand that banks pay them 18c for every $100 in transaction, more than double what they are charged by Visa and Mastercard. There is no reason that Apple won't let the banks use the NFC except Apple want complete control over it - which is their right, but is not good for us as consumers.
The difference is Touch ID combined with the secure enclave. Banks with their own apps will not use those features as it results in a reduction of customer information for them. They want to use their app with their features. Now, they might even get that eventually, but in the short term it is less secure than Apple Pay. Samsung is not in the same position as Apple. If An Apple product has a breach, it will be headlines for weeks. Less so for a Samsung product. It would just not attract the same degree of click bait headlines. So Apple is ultra cautious.
Meanwhile, I am in the process of switching from my 27 year old year old visa account with Westpac to ANZ.
I think the big 4 banks in this filing are missing the point of a wallet. By design, a wallet keeps all your bank cards (from any bank) as well as loyalty cards etc. The big 4 state that they want people to have the choice of their wallet provider. However, non of the banks are providing wallets. They provide apps to their own products. NAB most definitely won't allow me to store my ANZ cards etc.
It is only Apple that is offering a "wallet" to anybody who is interested.
Apple, whatever fingers it may want to have in the pie, is still providing the most secure solution for it's customers. I'll take that over whatever service Australia's banks want to push onto me.
My bank is offering financial service since 1945, Apple started 2 years ago The financial services of my bank are audited yearly by an independent organization, Apple isn't I take me 15 minutes to get an appointment with a bank representative, I cannot get an appointment with someone from Apple All the data of my bank is stored in a national data center, Apple stores its data in a foreign data center, If have a dispute with Apple, I have no chance to access my data and to prove I am right My bank supports heavily open standards, Apple has a closed iOS ecosystem My bank is expensive. Apple is expensive
And you want me to believe that Apple is a more trustworthy partner than my bank. You must be kidding
Not at all.
Apple is considerably more trustworthy than any of the major banks in Australia, and has vastly superior customer service. Australian banks get bulk data breaches all the time, Apple has currently had zero (passwords being re-used or phished is not a bill data breach). Although some people have alleged in speculation that bulk breaches have occurred , Apple is legallly required to provide notification if such a thing happened , and they never have had to notify.
In the specific instance of Apple Pay , the Secure Element and NFC hardware was added just for payments, just with ApplePay. It is not used for anything else. There are no APIs to touch the NFC hardware , outside of Apple Pay, for anything else in iOS - there's no "Samsung bump" or similar uses for App developers , Apple internal or App Store.
So Apple is not giving ANY developer access to. NFC , for ANY purpose. They are not singling out the banks.
Apple provides Bluetooth 4.2 to developers if they want short range low power radios. There is exactly nothing you can do on NFC that you can not do with Bluetooth ( and BT does more than NFC). It's just that there is a historical installed base of NFC readers is dominant in payment tech.bot that Apple only supports a handful (6-8 depending on device) of the 30+ Bluetooth profiles, so it limits what 3rd party dev's can do with it.
The banks falsely assert NFC is unique in iOS devices, in that it's not open to developers, and all other radios are. The banks statement is false : Apple does not provide direct access to ANY radio on the device : Bluetooth, GPS, Cellular , and Wi-fi are all completely restricted , and abstracted from the developer with high level , abstract APIs that do not give direct access to the hardware.
HID started shipping BT door locks in addition to their NFC ones a few years ago, as one example of hardware vendors moving with the times.
NFC is ancient, with commercial deployments dating back to the late 1980s.
The NFC Secure Element functionally duplicates a subset of what Apple provides in the Secure Enclave.
My best guess is Apple are only temporarily including the NFC with Secure Element , and are planning to abandon it in favor of an API sitting on top of Securd Enclave, but still capable of NFC (several component vendors are starting to deliver NFC / BT chipsets )
If the current hardware is transient and single purpose , then it's not unreasonable it's not open to 3rd parties.
i'd add that ever applet Apple allows to be installed on the Secure Element means they need to re-certify with EMVco, so it's a non-zero cost to them to maintain certification with potentially 3000 - 4000 different bank's applets, and the cost of doing that is also a deterrent to it being opened up to 3rd parties. How do they certify the good banks but keep out the bad ones (and there are plenty of bad banks globally)
The banks are not proposing to force their customers to do anything. They want to be able to offer Apple Pay alternatives. How would the banks proposals jeopardize their customers security? They seem to manage to handle AU$2 Billion in contactless payments a week in Australia without the sky falling down:
That's a flawed argument. Access to the hardware is controlled, and there is no software development kit for these machines that anyone can use to program them. So you can't compare that to iPhones.
My bank is offering financial service since 1945, Apple started 2 years ago The financial services of my bank are audited yearly by an independent organization, Apple isn't I take me 15 minutes to get an appointment with a bank representative, I cannot get an appointment with someone from Apple All the data of my bank is stored in a national data center, Apple stores its data in a foreign data center, If have a dispute with Apple, I have no chance to access my data and to prove I am right My bank supports heavily open standards, Apple has a closed iOS ecosystem My bank is expensive. Apple is expensive
And you want me to believe that Apple is a more trustworthy partner than my bank. You must be kidding
Not at all.
Apple is considerably more trustworthy than any of the major banks in Australia, and has vastly superior customer service. Australian banks get bulk data breaches all the time, Apple has currently had zero (passwords being re-used or phished is not a bill data breach). Although some people have alleged in speculation that bulk breaches have occurred , Apple is legallly required to provide notification if such a thing happened , and they never have had to notify.
Apple provides Bluetooth 4.2 to developers if they want short range low power radios. There is exactly nothing you can do on NFC that you can not do with Bluetooth ( and BT does more than NFC). It's just that there is a historical installed base of NFC readers is dominant in payment tech.bot that Apple only supports a handful (6-8 depending on device) of the 30+ Bluetooth profiles, so it limits what 3rd party dev's can do with it.
Could you provide links detailing these data breaches of Australian banks that you say happen all the time.
The banks can not use bluetooth on an iPhone to make an NFC capable payment app, so actually there is something you can't do with BT that you can do with NFC
As I said in March: The poor Commonwealth and other banks charging the highest fees in the world. Today the poor Comm bank came with all time high profits of only 9.45 billion dollars, and it is worried that Apple Pay will considerably demolish those small profits.
Add to this the Australian government opposition to the Royal Commission to investigate the banks because as it says "they should investigate themselves - no need for Royal Commission". Same like tobacco companies coming with reports that smoking is healthy!
I am so sick and tired of things being called "anti-competitive" that aren't any such thing.
Is it "anti-competitive" for a restaurant to serve only the food that they themselves prepare? Is it "anti-competitive" for factory car dealers to only sell their own brand of automobile?
The why the fvck is it "anti-competitive" for a device payment service provider to only support their own payment app?
It is not anti-competitive for Apple to restrict access to the NFC chip, or any other part of the iPhone. The banks are free to develop, market, and manufacture their own solutions, thus competing in the market.
3rd Party wallets do not have the same security as Apple Pay which is rock solid. The only breaches that have occurred have been the result of a bank not properly vetting a customer's credit/debit card when added to Apple Pay. However, Samsung Wallet has a vulnerability just discovered and will be revealed at an upcoming Black Hat security conference. The banks do not want to integrated with Apple Pay by simply joining in and allowing their customers to register debit/credit cards with their iPhone wallet. They want to use alternative wallet providers which have not been proven and are not safe and who apparently offer greater financial incentives for the bank at the expense of the consumer.
Even if they did manage to have their own app integrated with a 3rd party wallet it won't be that good of an experience. The iPhone/Watch Apple Pay is crazy easy to use. The Android solutions are not even close and again they are vulnerable. You can already use an NFC reader and scan credit cards inside someones wallet or purse walking down the street. Wireless is inherently dangerous. Cars with keyless entry fobs have been hacked by simply boosting the radio from the car to the fob to extend the range using a portable repeater/amplifier and click/click the doors are unlocked and in many cases you can drive away while the key fob is hanging on a hook inside the house or in the owners pocket while they are in a store or restaurant. I do not trust 3rd party's with the technology, Apple's integration of hardware, software, and cloud infrastructure with a strong focus on security and key escrow on secure chips have not been replicated by anyone else. There are flaws in the 3rd party designs that cannot be fixed. There cannot be a 3rd party solution on an iPhone that integrates with TouchID and the NFC chip. You would have to unlock your phone, switch to the banks app authenticate to the app start a wallet transaction, etc. It would be tedious where with Apple Pay you just double-click the home button while locked select the card and finger print scan while waving near the reader and DING transaction processed. Or you double-click the Watch button and select the card and wave the watch, DING transition processed. If I have to jump through more steps I might as well take out my credit card and go the old fashioned route.
I am so sick and tired of things being called "anti-competitive" that aren't any such thing.
Is it "anti-competitive" for a restaurant to serve only the food that they themselves prepare? Is it "anti-competitive" for factory car dealers to only sell their own brand of automobile?
The why the fvck is it "anti-competitive" for a device payment service provider to only support their own payment app?
It is not anti-competitive for Apple to restrict access to the NFC chip, or any other part of the iPhone. The banks are free to develop, market, and manufacture their own solutions, thus competing in the market.
Good luck with that.
Funny how people don't apply this logic when the banks refuse to allow Apple to profit from a free ride on their systems. Then it's the banks who are accused of being anti-competitive.
My bank is offering financial service since 1945, Apple started 2 years ago The financial services of my bank are audited yearly by an independent organization, Apple isn't I take me 15 minutes to get an appointment with a bank representative, I cannot get an appointment with someone from Apple All the data of my bank is stored in a national data center, Apple stores its data in a foreign data center, If have a dispute with Apple, I have no chance to access my data and to prove I am right My bank supports heavily open standards, Apple has a closed iOS ecosystem My bank is expensive. Apple is expensive
And you want me to believe that Apple is a more trustworthy partner than my bank. You must be kidding
Yeesh, the bank really saw you coming.
what a great way of admitting that you have no argument to trust Apple more than my bank. For the record I don't trust my bank blindly, like I don't trust Apple blindly (e.g. I don't use iCloud)
In case of an issue, I can change bank any minute without much hassle. If I have invested too much in the iOS ecosystem, that is much harder. Or put in your words, Apple really saw you coming.
Apple is considerably more trustworthy than any of the major banks in Australia, and has vastly superior customer service. Australian banks get bulk data breaches all the time, Apple has currently had zero (passwords being re-used or phished is not a bill data breach). Although some people have alleged in speculation that bulk breaches have occurred , Apple is legallly required to provide notification if such a thing happened , and they never have had to notify.
Apple provides Bluetooth 4.2 to developers if they want short range low power radios. There is exactly nothing you can do on NFC that you can not do with Bluetooth ( and BT does more than NFC). It's just that there is a historical installed base of NFC readers is dominant in payment tech.bot that Apple only supports a handful (6-8 depending on device) of the 30+ Bluetooth profiles, so it limits what 3rd party dev's can do with it.
Could you provide links detailing these data breaches of Australian banks that you say happen all the time.
Are Australian banks required to report it? If so, how long after a breach before they're required to?
In the US, banks have held on to info like that until pried out of them. Even when pried out of them, we're still not sure of which banks, and to what extent. You can easily look that up.
Apple, whatever fingers it may want to have in the pie, is still providing the most secure solution for it's customers. I'll take that over whatever service Australia's banks want to push onto me.
My bank is offering financial service since 1945, Apple started 2 years ago The financial services of my bank are audited yearly by an independent organization, Apple isn't I take me 15 minutes to get an appointment with a bank representative, I cannot get an appointment with someone from Apple All the data of my bank is stored in a national data center, Apple stores its data in a foreign data center, If have a dispute with Apple, I have no chance to access my data and to prove I am right My bank supports heavily open standards, Apple has a closed iOS ecosystem My bank is expensive. Apple is expensive
And you want me to believe that Apple is a more trustworthy partner than my bank. You must be kidding
- There's no correlation between how long a company has been doing business to how trustworthy they are. - Apple doesn't handle financial transactions so they don't need to be audited. - Why do you need to get an appointment with Apple? If you have a payment problem you have to contact the bank since Apple isn't involved in financial transactions. - Apple Pay is built using the EMVco tokenization standard. It HAS to be built on a standard, otherwise you couldn't use it at any of the countless different POS terminals from various manufacturers all over the world.
Could you provide links detailing these data breaches of Australian banks that you say happen all the time.
Are Australian banks required to report it? If so, how long after a breach before they're required to?
In the US, banks have held on to info like that until pried out of them. Even when pried out of them, we're still not sure of which banks, and to what extent. You can easily look that up.
I don't know, but since the OP was making a very specific claim, I am assuming there is information in the public domain that was the source, hence my asking for it.
People often misunderstood that Apple Pay is only NFC chip. What Apple protect here is their implementation of transaction or surprise, consumer's security. If you read how Apple Pay works, Apple has no access to transaction whatsover. Bank still keeping the controls of all transaction and tokenization. Apple simply play as a conduit, but a very secure conduit, compare to Samsung Pay. Which is why I stated, by giving away that particular control to bank, Apple is jeopardizing
The moment it would become known that a bank is taken security not as seriously as it should, the customer would lose the trust in the bank and would redraw all his money from the bank.
LOL. Anyone can steal your NFC Visa card and use it wherever, unlike with Apple Pay. Anyone can steal your physical MasterCard and use it online anywhere, not so with Apple Pay. The banks have always and continue to provide solutions that offer inferior security to the best available and nobody withdraws their money. The reason Apple gets a cut from Apple Pay is because the banks can easily afford it with all the fraud Apple Pay prevents. Think first, talk later please.
The banks make plenty of money off the credit cards they issue. Apple is taking a minuscule transaction fee to make the process more secure than the cards themselves. Me thinks these banks are idiots.
Comments
The moment it would become known that a bank is taken security not as seriously as it should, the customer would lose the trust in the bank and would redraw all his money from the bank. Despite their commercial tactics, we all hate, we do trust banks
The financial services of my bank are audited yearly by an independent organization, Apple isn't
I take me 15 minutes to get an appointment with a bank representative, I cannot get an appointment with someone from Apple
All the data of my bank is stored in a national data center, Apple stores its data in a foreign data center, If have a dispute with Apple, I have no chance to access my data and to prove I am right
My bank supports heavily open standards, Apple has a closed iOS ecosystem
My bank is expensive. Apple is expensive
And you want me to believe that Apple is a more trustworthy partner than my bank. You must be kidding
Meanwhile, I am in the process of switching from my 27 year old year old visa account with Westpac to ANZ.
I think the big 4 banks in this filing are missing the point of a wallet. By design, a wallet keeps all your bank cards (from any bank) as well as loyalty cards etc. The big 4 state that they want people to have the choice of their wallet provider. However, non of the banks are providing wallets. They provide apps to their own products. NAB most definitely won't allow me to store my ANZ cards etc.
It is only Apple that is offering a "wallet" to anybody who is interested.
Apple is considerably more trustworthy than any of the major banks in Australia, and has vastly superior customer service. Australian banks get bulk data breaches all the time, Apple has currently had zero (passwords being re-used or phished is not a bill data breach). Although some people have alleged in speculation that bulk breaches have occurred , Apple is legallly required to provide notification if such a thing happened , and they never have had to notify.
In the specific instance of Apple Pay , the Secure Element and NFC hardware was added just for payments, just with ApplePay. It is not used for anything else. There are no APIs to touch the NFC hardware , outside of Apple Pay, for anything else in iOS - there's no "Samsung bump" or similar uses for App developers , Apple internal or App Store.
So Apple is not giving ANY developer access to. NFC , for ANY purpose. They are not singling out the banks.
Apple provides Bluetooth 4.2 to developers if they want short range low power radios. There is exactly nothing you can do on NFC that you can not do with Bluetooth ( and BT does more than NFC). It's just that there is a historical installed base of NFC readers is dominant in payment tech.bot that Apple only supports a handful (6-8 depending on device) of the 30+ Bluetooth profiles, so it limits what 3rd party dev's can do with it.
The banks falsely assert NFC is unique in iOS devices, in that it's not open to developers, and all other radios are. The banks statement is false : Apple does not provide direct access to ANY radio on the device : Bluetooth, GPS, Cellular , and Wi-fi are all completely restricted , and abstracted from the developer with high level , abstract APIs that do not give direct access to the hardware.
HID started shipping BT door locks in addition to their NFC ones a few years ago, as one example of hardware vendors moving with the times.
NFC is ancient, with commercial deployments dating back to the late 1980s.
The NFC Secure Element functionally duplicates a subset of what Apple provides in the Secure Enclave.
My best guess is Apple are only temporarily including the NFC with Secure Element , and are planning to abandon it in favor of an API sitting on top of Securd Enclave, but still capable of NFC (several component vendors are starting to deliver NFC / BT chipsets )
If the current hardware is transient and single purpose , then it's not unreasonable it's not open to 3rd parties.
i'd add that ever applet Apple allows to be installed on the Secure Element means they need to re-certify with EMVco, so it's a non-zero cost to them to maintain certification with potentially 3000 - 4000 different bank's applets, and the cost of doing that is also a deterrent to it being opened up to 3rd parties. How do they certify the good banks but keep out the bad ones (and there are plenty of bad banks globally)
The banks can not use bluetooth on an iPhone to make an NFC capable payment app, so actually there is something you can't do with BT that you can do with NFC
The poor Commonwealth and other banks charging the highest fees in the world. Today the poor Comm bank came with all time high profits of only 9.45 billion dollars, and it is worried that Apple Pay will considerably demolish those small profits.
Add to this the Australian government opposition to the Royal Commission to investigate the banks because as it says "they should investigate themselves - no need for Royal Commission". Same like tobacco companies coming with reports that smoking is healthy!
I am so sick and tired of things being called "anti-competitive" that aren't any such thing.
Is it "anti-competitive" for a restaurant to serve only the food that they themselves prepare? Is it "anti-competitive" for factory car dealers to only sell their own brand of automobile?
The why the fvck is it "anti-competitive" for a device payment service provider to only support their own payment app?
It is not anti-competitive for Apple to restrict access to the NFC chip, or any other part of the iPhone. The banks are free to develop, market, and manufacture their own solutions, thus competing in the market.
Good luck with that.
Even if they did manage to have their own app integrated with a 3rd party wallet it won't be that good of an experience. The iPhone/Watch Apple Pay is crazy easy to use. The Android solutions are not even close and again they are vulnerable. You can already use an NFC reader and scan credit cards inside someones wallet or purse walking down the street. Wireless is inherently dangerous. Cars with keyless entry fobs have been hacked by simply boosting the radio from the car to the fob to extend the range using a portable repeater/amplifier and click/click the doors are unlocked and in many cases you can drive away while the key fob is hanging on a hook inside the house or in the owners pocket while they are in a store or restaurant. I do not trust 3rd party's with the technology, Apple's integration of hardware, software, and cloud infrastructure with a strong focus on security and key escrow on secure chips have not been replicated by anyone else. There are flaws in the 3rd party designs that cannot be fixed. There cannot be a 3rd party solution on an iPhone that integrates with TouchID and the NFC chip. You would have to unlock your phone, switch to the banks app authenticate to the app start a wallet transaction, etc. It would be tedious where with Apple Pay you just double-click the home button while locked select the card and finger print scan while waving near the reader and DING transaction processed. Or you double-click the Watch button and select the card and wave the watch, DING transition processed. If I have to jump through more steps I might as well take out my credit card and go the old fashioned route.
what a great way of admitting that you have no argument to trust Apple more than my bank. For the record I don't trust my bank blindly, like I don't trust Apple blindly (e.g. I don't use iCloud)
In case of an issue, I can change bank any minute without much hassle. If I have invested too much in the iOS ecosystem, that is much harder. Or put in your words, Apple really saw you coming.
In the US, banks have held on to info like that until pried out of them. Even when pried out of them, we're still not sure of which banks, and to what extent. You can easily look that up.
- There's no correlation between how long a company has been doing business to how trustworthy they are.
- Apple doesn't handle financial transactions so they don't need to be audited.
- Why do you need to get an appointment with Apple? If you have a payment problem you have to contact the bank since Apple isn't involved in financial transactions.
- Apple Pay is built using the EMVco tokenization standard. It HAS to be built on a standard, otherwise you couldn't use it at any of the countless different POS terminals from various manufacturers all over the world.
You got anymore crap you want to fling?