> it’s hardly reasonable to say that they’re not allowed to use what ever technical options they can to prevent that fraud.
Of course it's reasonable? You can give someone a job and also ask them to do it a certain way.
Of course it's reasonable? You can give someone a job and also ask them to do it a certain way.
And they can say “no”. Which is pretty much what the banks do.
Regulators are one of the entities pushing for these types of limitations. It’s a natural consequence of doing a risk assessment, very hard to justify not applying these limits when explaining to a regulator how you keep your customer funds safe. I’m speaking from experience here having worked with a team that attempted exactly that, but ultimately ended up adding jailbreak/rooting detection anyway.
If you want to tax banks and pay the money directly to fraudsters, I guess that's a model you can aim for.