G+_Vance McAlister Posted October 1, 2015 Share Posted October 1, 2015 Android Pay and the Screen Lock requirement The problem with the Screen Lock requirement for Android Pay is this: We should be able to opt out of that inconvenience if we are willing to take the risk. Sure, make it the default, but like allowing "unknown sources" for apps, we should have the option to take the risk. We are big boys and girls. Or require that a PIN be entered when we use Android Pay if we have not already used a lockscreen. Requiring that I use a lockscreen every time I use my phone just so that a PIN is entered on the rare occasion I will use Android Pay is intense overkill. But that is not all: even if you have Smart Unlock, with a watch, trusted places or wifi, etc, you STILL have to put in a Pattern or PIN to use Android Pay, even though the phone is unlocked in a situation you can trust! So, now I already have my phone unlocked, I go to the terminal and tap, it prompts the PIN or Pattern, then I have to tap again. That level of inconvenience that make it almost not worth using. Ron Richards Florence Ion Jason Howell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_Daniel Cook Posted October 1, 2015 Share Posted October 1, 2015 You are not taking the risk, the credit card companies are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_Jacob “Jake” Bowen Posted October 1, 2015 Share Posted October 1, 2015 I understand your frustration, I think it should require a lock on the app, but not the phone its self. That being said trusted devices are pointless if you still have to use a pin at the point of sale. I have two thiughts. 1. This is a push to get oems to implement fingerprint sensors because, that would be a less intrusive more natural way to increase security. 2. This is due to techno panic and all of our stuff will be "hacked" without the password lock. Google is just trying to prevent a PR nightmare of some media outlet doing a story on how insecure Android is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_Vance McAlister Posted October 1, 2015 Author Share Posted October 1, 2015 Daniel Cook But no more of a risk than my card getting lost or stolen. I have lost my card a few times, but never a phone. But even if this were the case, having to enter a PIN or pattern even when the phone is smart unlocked is overkill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_Steve Smith Posted October 1, 2015 Share Posted October 1, 2015 I like to think that this requirement will go away for the new Nexus Line and a fingerprint will be sufficient to do a transaction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_Vance McAlister Posted October 1, 2015 Author Share Posted October 1, 2015 Jacob is right, even if the credit card companies wanted at least one level of security, the easiest way of doing it is to require EITHER the pattern/PIN when you use the app, or make us use a lockscreen. Requiring that I use a lockscreen every time I use my phone just so that a PIN is entered on the rare occasion I will use Android Pay is intense overkill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G+_L I Posted October 3, 2015 Share Posted October 3, 2015 Vance McAlister I think Daniel Cook is right - remember the risk equation changed on October 1. So I'm guessing that this was the deal Google agreed to to get the product out the door - or rather to keep mobile payments as a thing on Android. I agree that they want to push the fingerprint scanner. I also agree that it is very inconvenient if it indeed doesn't use trusted devices and makes you tap twice. And that may be one of the reasons I never use Pay. But, like the original Wallet/Verizon battle with Google, they can only do what the card companies let them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts