I wanted to find out whether it's possible to create two separate Standard Bank ID's for the same account? Basically, I have a business account that I need a second person to login and view statements. But they only need to view statements - a read only account. For security reasons, I don't want to give me the main login details, so is there a way to create and link a second profile to view the same account? Even if the second account has full permissions, I'd still want a separate account at least.
FNB allows the creation of a secondary, read-only account. SB is really lagging behind on basic functionality like this. I also looked at the business online section, but we need the normal web-based access, so that offering won't work.
I would like this feature when it comes to using budget applications that need your login details to collect information about your accounts.
I would feel less concerned about giving my login details to (a reputable) 3rd party if I knew that the login details I was giving out will only allow "someone" to "view" my details if their systems where somehow hacked.
Like Steven mentioned FNB has done this I think its pretty smart and innovative of them.
I would like to see Standard bank showing that they are not too incumbent by atleast replying to this feature request and giving us an indication if they think its a good idea and if they will consider putting it on on their development roadmap?
Has there been any progress in this regard? I would also like to use this feature ASAP. Your competitors have been offering it for years so it's about time SB caught up :)
Please note that it is still not possible to have two separate logins for one internet banking account due to security purposes. This is to ensure that there is no duplication or compromise of customer details, and also hacking that would otherwise impair on his/her Internet Banking experience. Kindly be advised that if the customer attempts to register with the same account number, an error will be incurred as the system will recall the account number attempting to be used.
The point of creating a secondary (read only) login is precisely for security purposes. Users often give their accountants or 3rd party budgeting/accounting apps access to their bank accounts via this read-only password (as done by your competitors without issue) thus allowing them to pull the necessary data but preventing them from compromising any other functions.
It's nothing new, and has been effectively practiced by numerous banks for years. I'm not sure why Standard Bank doesn't.
"Security" as a response seems like an excuse rather than a reason.
Please elevate this to your Security and Tech departments and get a qualified response on the idea as I feel like it's being shrugged off despite its merit.
Looking forward to your soonest response.
As a software engineer, I disagree with you completely.
Its just a software problem and a feature that needs to be developed and developed properly to avoid security issues. This is one of the many challenges of any decent software team: develop new innovative features while keeping the system secure.
The 2nd readonly login profile is not a new problem and it has been well solved by other companies already.
BTW: What is a real security concern for me is that I had to use my precious internet banking login details just to add this comment on this (community) website.
Suggestions for this feature:
Any feedback on read-only access to accounts?
Is there anywhere where we can request or see upcoming features?
This question was raised 3 years ago. Standard Bank responded 1.5 years ago saying that this would be passed on to their development team. Now, a year and a half later, we have no feedback. This forum is useless if legitimate issues or questions raised, like this one, are simply ignored. I too have this need and would have expected it to already be in place. This is not an unusual use-case to allow statement reconciliation and budgeting tools to integrate and receive transaction history. Please revert with the latest status asap. Thanks.