Talk:Interac e-Transfer

Advert tag?

How does this article read like an advertisement... compared to what it was like before? -- AirOdyssey (Talk) 01:02, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

No answer after more than a week. I removed the tag. Feel free to put it up again, after you explain your reasons here. Cheers! -- AirOdyssey (Talk) 02:37, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

The article says its limited to personal accounts but business accounts work fine too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.97.38.12 (talk) 09:43, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Moved to Interac e-Transfer

I have moved this page from Email Money Transfer to Interac e-Transfer reflecting the new name used on the Interac website ("Interac Email Money Transfer is transitioning to a new name, Interac e-Transfer.") I have also made several changes to the page, mostly cleanup, the biggest of which was the removal of the list of the Credit Unions which support e-Transfers. It's a fairly hefty list and the page on the Interac website listing all of them is linked to from the article. DubiousIrony ^yell 03:38, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

CertaPay

CertaPay redirects here, but is not explained in the article. -- Beland (talk) 22:44, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

e transfer security

I'm new here, so be kind.

First, the background. My wife and I were recently robbed of over $4000 via a combination of apparently sophisticated email spoofing and perhaps other mechanisms. As far as the Credit Union, the contractor who was the intended recipient of the funds, the RCMP, and I are able to determine, the contractor's business email account was invisibly hacked (no sign of mischief left on his Apple laptop), and the actual transfer to his email account, which transfer was entered independently to the correct email address on the secure Credit Union website was intercepted and sent to two bank accounts in Canada but unrelated to the Contractor. The RCMP investigation continues, but seems unlikely to discover much more than is already apparent.

In my dealing with the Credit Union on this event, a couple aspects of the interac e-transfer process came to light that I found disturbing. First, I did not understand the degree to which a person's or a business's email accounts could be taken over invisibly by a perpetrator of internet fraud. The money I sent was in response to an email request for a deposit on a roofing job quoted earlier by the contractor (a personal friend in no way involved in the fraud by the way). The request for the deposit arrived as a seamless continuation of the email exchange previously established with the contractor. The language used was even designed to mimic the contractor's writing habits as a Francophone using English as a second language. There was no hint in the sender's address heading that the emails regarding the deposit came from anyone other than the contractor who sent the quote for the work. The request for a deposit was very reasonable under the circumstances of the upcoming work, and its arrival in the context of the negotiations over the work appeared perfectly normal. Once the fraud became apparent, there was no sign of any of the deposit emails in the contractor's email account. The entire interaction over the deposit was completely invisible from his end throughout the process.

Second, I was not aware of the fact that there is absolutely no link between the recipient of the email transfer notification and the bank accounts into which the funds may be deposited. The recipient of the email can deposit the funds to any account at any participating financial institution in Canada. Although the e transfer entry page on the Credit Union website identified the specific contractor as the recipient associated with the entered email address, the transfer system in no way checks or determines whether the target bank account is owned by or in any way associated with the individual responding to the email. In short, anyone who is in a position to respond to the email, legitimately so or otherwise, can put the money anywhere in Canada they want - and then transfer it electronically wherever permitted by the downstream institution(s). In effect, this means that anyone with access to the email account, be they a family teenager; an unscrupulous spouse, business partner, or co-worker; or an email account hacker, anyone with access to the email account can transfer the money anywhere in Canada that they want, and the transfer is irreversible. It seems to me that this is a glaring vulnerability to the e transfer system, one that deserves a more detailed description than simply stating that the system is subject to email spoofing.

Obviously, I am not a neutral observer here, but I might be willing to edit the security section of the interac transfer description if I can do so in compliance with Wikipedia policy. The difficulty is that in spite of digging on this issue, I have not uncovered an authoritative source which clearly articulates these two vulnerabilities. The only way I became aware of them is through my being victimized.

If someone else here would like to take this on, please advise. If someone here thinks I am off base suggesting expansion of the article to clarify these vulnerabilities, please say so. My main concern here is that these vulnerabilities are not adequately identified in the Interac website or anywhere else that I can find. It seems to me that Wikipedia has an opportunity to clarify this in a manner that more fully informs lay persons of their vulnerabilities in the Interac e transfer system.

Thanks for reading,

Allan Edie — Preceding unsigned comment added by Allan Edie (talk • contribs) 15:39, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi Allan Edie, As you noted above, Wikipedia is not a place to share personal experiences; however, as with the transfer being done through the internet, their is always a risk involved. If you can find an article for a reputable source (such as CBC or CTV), please submit an edit request and an editor will review and act upon the information (if it is determined to be suitable content for an encyclopedia. If you have any additional questions, please post a message on my talk page. Have a great day, Daylen (talk) 04:38, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

History?

Surprised no details at all about history / implementation of this technology. Someone must know enough to rough it out. Kav2001c (talk) 19:04, 14 October 2020 (UTC)kav2001c