Hacker News
points by alecsm 1 day ago | 0 comments
Because these API are not meant to be public for the end user to use.

Access to that kind of data requires regulation, a lot of it and that's why Third Party Providers exist. There are a lot of them in Europe and they're not expensive.

I actually didn't expect to find anything about bunq around here but I have to say they're the worst bank I've worked with. When we started working with them, their API were broken and the devs had no idea why. It seems to have improved recently but it's definitely not a bank to praise for their API.

[–] Semaphor 1 day ago
Bunq… It’s great that they have an API, but to use it, I had to clone their SDK, and manually fix everything that was broken, add some workarounds, and now it works. Documentation was all from the announcement in 2016, me using it was ~2022, and some undocumented things changed since. Still, better than no API, which is what everyone else seems to offer.

And now we have a paypal-like shopping experience via SEPA Instant Payments, all our PayPal hating customers are happy ;)

[–] elric 1 day ago
> Because these API are not meant to be public for the end user to use.

I know, that's my point. It's a stupid decision.

> Access to that kind of data requires regulation

It's my data. I want to access it how I see fit.

> There are a lot of them in Europe and they're not expensive.

I already have a bank and I already pay them. I don't want to pay anyone else to be able to use my bank account in a way that suits me. Sadly, there aren't many good options.

Someone mentioned Wise, and they do seem pretty interesting. But it makes no sense why common high strees banks refuse to cater to power users, or even to users who aren't using mainstream devices.

[–] jcsager 1 day ago
>It's my data. I want to access it how I see fit

It ain't your data, it's the bank's data about you. Banks are shitty about access, APIs because they are perpetually in CYA mode from KYC/AML rules from the US (also on most foreign banks) and GDPR and cousins in Europe.

I was actually surprised how many bank apps will work under GrapheneOS even if only partially.

[–] esseph 1 day ago
> But it makes no sense why common high strees banks refuse to cater to power users

"Power users" don't make them more money. In fact, from their POV, you're a legal, reputational, and security liability.

[–] rockskon 1 day ago
Reputational and security liability is highly debatable. Legal is highly jurisdiction dependant.

They often act as marketing and can find and report security vulnerabilities rather than the criminal element doing so first.

[–] esseph 1 day ago
> Reputational and security liability is highly debatable

Hmmm then why are banks telling people to not use AI systems to log into their bank?

https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/us-banks-detect-una...

https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/canadian-banks-block-ai-9.7...

[–] rockskon 1 day ago
Is this thread not a conversation about GrapheneOS and those that use it? I'm not sure what relevance AI has here.
[–] esseph 1 day ago
Parent thread is discussing banking API access, and requiring a particular type of phone and OS to access said services.

Seems to be in the "banks controlling how customers access services" context.

[–] rockskon 1 day ago
It is hardly a reasonable comparison in a thread about a bank ASN blocking non-Google Android to equivocate that to blocking consumers using AI agents from making transactions with a user's banking info.