The views and opinions expressed in this editorial article are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Post or Eagle Media. The editorial is intended to stimulate critical thinking and debate on issues of public interest and should be read with an open mind. Readers are encouraged to consider multiple sources of information and to form their own informed opinions.
By: JULIE FALKNER
I spent most of my career working in IT.
For years, my job was to think about systems, security and what could go wrong when sensitive information falls into the wrong hands. In this business, you learn quickly that trust is hard to earn and easy to lose.
Now retired and living in Lenexa, Kansas, I use the same digital financial tools millions of Americans rely on every day. I transfer money electronically, manage accounts from my phone and appreciate the convenience technology brings.
But convenience should never come at the expense of security.
Like so many Americans, I've had my personal information exposed in data breaches over the years. It's frustrating and unsettling. Once your information is out there, you don't get a second chance to protect it.
That's why I find it surprising that companies accessing our most sensitive financial information aren't held to the same standards as the financial institutions that protect our money.
Most people have never heard of the companies that move data between financial institutions and the apps we use every day. But whether consumers know their names isn't the point.
The point is simple: if a company can access my bank account information, it should be held to the same security standards as my bank.
That's not anti-technology. It's common sense.
Innovation has transformed how we manage our finances, and I want that innovation to continue. But innovation works best when consumers trust the system. That trust depends on strong security and accountability for everyone involved. And innovation doesn’t come at the cost of security.
Consumers overwhelmingly believe companies accessing banking data should meet the same high security standards as financial institutions. They also believe those companies should share in the responsibility and cost of protecting that information.
I agree.
For too long, we've operated under a two-tiered system. Under the Section 1033 rule, financial institutions were required to invest heavily in protecting customer information, while fintech companies accessing that same information weren't held to the same standards. Even worse, they sell that same data to other third parties for a fee.
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) have an historic opportunity to fix that. By requiring every company receiving Americans' banking data to meet the same standard of care, they can raise the bar on consumer protection, eliminate this two-tiered system and restore confidence that our financial information is being protected no matter where it goes.
Consumers don't care whether a security failure happens at a bank, a technology company or somewhere in between. If their information is stolen, the consequences are the same.
As someone who spent a career in technology, I know security isn't a one-time investment. It's an ongoing commitment.
As a consumer and former IT professional, that's all I'm asking for: one standard, applied equally, that puts security and consumers first.