21st-century safety deposit box protocols?
June 2, 2016 11:33 AM Subscribe
I opened up a safety deposit box, and was surprised to learn that my bank uses a "face recognition" program (not working at the moment, don't worry, we'll fix it soon) to control access to the vault. And thus, the box I'm renting can be unlocked with only my key. Is this practice standard for big banks these days?
I fully appreciate that if the bank's security practices don't meet my expectations, I should simply take my business elsewhere.
The bank manager explained to me that because their face-recognition system wasn't working, they were doing things the "old fashioned" way, and that for the near future, I would need to get an employee to sign me into the vault when I wanted access. Which was what I expected to begin with.
But what struck me as odd is that while the vault contains safe deposit boxes that take two keys, on my box only the individual bolt controlled by my personal key was locked; the individual bolt controlled by bank's key is, apparently, permanently left in the "open" position. Thinking this through, it seems that the bank figures that anyone who would have the key to the vault would also have access to the bank's key to the box?
The bank is a branch of a large regional (but not national) bank.
How out of sync are these security practices with how safety deposit boxes are managed these days?
I fully appreciate that if the bank's security practices don't meet my expectations, I should simply take my business elsewhere.
The bank manager explained to me that because their face-recognition system wasn't working, they were doing things the "old fashioned" way, and that for the near future, I would need to get an employee to sign me into the vault when I wanted access. Which was what I expected to begin with.
But what struck me as odd is that while the vault contains safe deposit boxes that take two keys, on my box only the individual bolt controlled by my personal key was locked; the individual bolt controlled by bank's key is, apparently, permanently left in the "open" position. Thinking this through, it seems that the bank figures that anyone who would have the key to the vault would also have access to the bank's key to the box?
The bank is a branch of a large regional (but not national) bank.
How out of sync are these security practices with how safety deposit boxes are managed these days?
For what it's worth, my bank (in Virginia) still requires the two-keys method, and I've never even heard of this face-recognition thing.
(Then again, my bank was literally one of the last six in the entire country to assign account numbers --- they always said their customers were people, not numbers --- and only they added account numbers because the Fed forced them to do it: my 162-year-old bank doesn't take changes lightly.)
posted by easily confused at 12:17 PM on June 2, 2016 [1 favorite]
(Then again, my bank was literally one of the last six in the entire country to assign account numbers --- they always said their customers were people, not numbers --- and only they added account numbers because the Fed forced them to do it: my 162-year-old bank doesn't take changes lightly.)
posted by easily confused at 12:17 PM on June 2, 2016 [1 favorite]
It's not about the facial recognition, it's that there is a "dual-control" on the keyed box access but the bank's half of the control isn't being used.
They've effectively disable part of the security process because now if someone want to scam their way into that box, they just have to get access to both your key and the vault (which is often only locked overnight). If they were following the standard practice, it would mean they'd need access to the vault, your key, AND the bank's key. It's a LOT less secure this way since the bank's key is usually under controlled access (logged, only certain people carry a key, or dual-controlled).
I can't imagine that them leaving the key unlocked like that is their protocol but I don't know how you, as a consumer, would go about doing anything about it.
posted by VTX at 6:47 PM on June 2, 2016
They've effectively disable part of the security process because now if someone want to scam their way into that box, they just have to get access to both your key and the vault (which is often only locked overnight). If they were following the standard practice, it would mean they'd need access to the vault, your key, AND the bank's key. It's a LOT less secure this way since the bank's key is usually under controlled access (logged, only certain people carry a key, or dual-controlled).
I can't imagine that them leaving the key unlocked like that is their protocol but I don't know how you, as a consumer, would go about doing anything about it.
posted by VTX at 6:47 PM on June 2, 2016
It sounds like your face gets you into the vault and then your key opens the box? I'd guess this is supposed to save staff time and automate record keeping. I would have a lot of questions about their facial recognition software, I'm surprised that it's good enough that they believe it's a substitute for an ID. I know folks are also concerned about privacy of their box contents and might prefer not to need a staff member, but this wouldn't sit well with me.
Ask if they'll lock the bank lock on your box and if that would trigger an ID check by staff.
posted by momus_window at 7:26 PM on June 2, 2016
Ask if they'll lock the bank lock on your box and if that would trigger an ID check by staff.
posted by momus_window at 7:26 PM on June 2, 2016
« Older Notification of Movies / TV series availability on... | Setting up to sell online the right way - from the... Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by Anticipation Of A New Lover's Arrival, The at 11:55 AM on June 2, 2016