Omah, please accept my apologies. I started my post as a thread as I didn’t realise that you had already started the same. I quickly turned it into a post as soon as Meg made it part of your thread. Humble genuflected apologies again for treading on your toes with this topic. Hope I’m forgiven! 
You are kidding Bruce! There are more blackspots than signals here in the UK. It is absolutely rubbish. In Wales alone, one is lucky to get a signal at all once out of the towns. I spent my whole holiday there this year unable to use my laptop or mobile unless I travelled one mile into town. You are very lucky.
Zuileka, if you have chosen your PC desktop as your chosen device, it’s as Mups asked - How are you going to get your code if you are shopping in the high street? a computer is a lot heavier than a phone!!
To be honest I thought it was me seeing double but on checking again it was there twice. Worse was to come though. I could have sworn that was the first post on a brand new thread, although when I checked again that first post of your thread had become a post on another thread. Talk about confused! 
Then everything became clear – I read Omah’s post #16 and your post #21 – duplicate threads had been started!
Just pleased that I am not going completely round the twist! 
This whole mobile phone checking thing is a nonsense. It’s clearly part of a more sinister privacy invasion and tracking agenda.
Think it through.
The bank presents this whole thing as a way to increase security and reduce fraud. Previously we just kept passwords and when making online purchases we get asked for certain letters or digits from our passwords. That system worked just fine so why are they now wanting to use our mobile phones?
Now let’s just examine the true situation
How does the bank know which mobile phone number to send the code to when you make an online purchase?
Answer because it’s the number YOU registered with the bank in YOUR bank account.
So what happens if you decide to change your mobile phone, switch to a new network, or lose your mobile?
Answer, you’ll simply log into YOUR bank account online, validate yourself by giving your login and password and then change the registered mobile number details.
Gosh ! So we’re actually still 100% reliant on a login and password as we were before !!!
So if someone else gets your password for your bank account, then they can just go in and change the registered mobile number to their own and hey presto they can engage in fraud just as before.
So this mobile nonsense changes precisely nothing. It doesn’t solve any security issues, we are still beholden to normal login and passwords with our bank accounts . . . so why are they really doing it???
We are on the way to human RFID chip implants and likely DNA identification. National databases where we are all bagged and tagged, no privacy, just a number. Orwell was right!
I am sure you have your tin foil hat to keep you safe.
No apologies needed but I appreciate your comments …
My thread was started a month ago and had slipped over the horizon …
Already had a problem with this a couple of weeks ago. Mrs LD tried to buy something online, from a company we use all the time but she couldn’t complete the payment because the bank sent a text to her mobile - which she no longer has. Tried a different card and it went through OK.
I don’t shop with a card in the high street
Re your last paragraph .
So far as I’m aware from speaking to my bank this new security is about online purchases with your card .
Correct
But that doesn’t alter the fact that they are essentially lying about it all.
What security advantage does texting a verification code to your mobile have over the previous method of asking you to provide characters from a password when making online transactions?
It’s a total nonsense and another step towards total loss of privacy.
My online login has moved from username…password…and relatives middle name…to my thumbprint…immediate access to all my accounts
Far easier to fake a fingerprint than find out someone’s password. Madness.
Really? Tell me more…but wait…let me adjust this tin foil hat
Your fingerprints are all over this post Rehab. I’ll be sneaking into your account later today. :-p:-p
Sigh
A few simple examples going back as far as 2008
3 Reasons to Never Use Fingerprint Locks on Phones
"#1 People can hack your fingerprints (and scanners)
We leave fingerprints behind everywhere we go: on doorknobs, on railings, on cups and glasses, on keypads, on screens, in photos—you name it. So there are lots of places hackers can harvest this supposedly uncrackable password.
The Chaos Computer Club demonstrated this as far back as 2008. To protest a German politician’s proposal to implement biometrics, the club used a photograph to recreate his fingerprint. In 2013, it used latex to create a fake finger to open a lock. More recently, the approach has been repeated with playdough and Elmer’s glue, highlighting just how easy it is becoming to recreate physical prints.
Worse yet, fingerprints can also be hacked virtually. At the 2015 Black Hat convention in Las Vegas, a couple of security experts demonstrated a number of hacks for fingerprint locks. They built an app that mimicked a phone’s unlock screen; when used by the victim, it could approve a financial transaction. They pre-loaded fingerprints onto the phone, enabling access. They showed it was relatively easy to rebuild a fingerprint from the file used to store it. And they hacked the scanner itself, allowing them to grab fingerprint images whenever used.
#2 You can change your password — not your fingerprints
This is so basic it is often overlooked. When my email account was hacked several years ago, I changed the password and the problem went away. But if someone were to hack my fingerprint, they would always have it.
Think about what that means. Fingerprints are forever. Once the bad guys have them, they can keep using or selling them to other bad guys. This is particularly disturbing when you consider how many government organizations collect fingerprints and the increasing number of private firms using it for authentications.
#3 Police don’t need your permission to unlock a phone with biometrics
It is also important to remember that we are not always in control of our own hands. All someone has to do to get you to unlock your phone is press your fingers against the screen.
This has been allowed in the US, where a judge granted a search order to police officers in Glendale, California. The position is that a fingerprint is “physical evidence”, akin to a physical key, which can be gathered as evidence or demanded by court order. Moreover, fingerprints are readily available because they are routinely collected as part of basic police and legal procedures. And because fingerprints are physical and not “testimony”, they are not protected by the Fifth Amendment’s clause on self-incrimination.
Not so passwords and PIN codes. Forcing a person to show you something “in their mind” is testimonial, and thus coercion is prohibited. Large tech companies (including AVG) make a similar argument about corporate information. Fighting the FBI to a largely unresolved standstill over access to the phone used by the San Bernardino terrorist, Apple made the legal argument that the FBI was attempting to force Apple to speak — and speak against its own interests, something that should not be allowed. The FBI dropped the case after paying a third party to hack the phone. While rent-a-hacker proved effective, it also proved rather expensive; and for the time being, most cases are unlikely to warrant such an investment.
Still, it is within the realm of possibility that law enforcement agencies could force or coerce manufacturers to include back doors to devices for harvesting prints through fingerprint locks."
No 2 there is the most important to understand.
There is simply no going back once someone gets hold of your fingerprint. Game over.
Because of that even a dimwit can see that this whole fingerprinting usage will, in no time at all, just collapse as more and more people fall foul of having had their fingerprints hacked. Once that happens in enough numbers the fingerprint system will be removed, abolished.
Of course by then a whole raft of the population will have unwittingly volunteered their fingerprints to any number of national databases like criminals, bagged and tagged forever.
Another load of concerns here:
"Security experts discovered that HTC One Max and Samsung Galaxy S5 smartphones stored fingerprint images in an unencrypted, readable-by-any-app .bmp file — just as a common bitmap picture. Any software, which has access to user’s pictures and Internet, could steal them. Developers produced a patch soon after the discovery but who guarantees that they won’t make similar mistakes with new phones and OS releases?
Moreover, many smartphones have poorly protected sensors, which let malware get the pictures right from the fingerprint scanners."
What load of ill informed, googled bollox.
So simple… Just use a different finger.
hahahahahahahahahaha
hahahahahahahahahaha
breathe . . . . . .
hahahahahahahahahaahaha
Naturally once 10 fingers are up you can start using your toes
Sheesh !
Perhaps in the future we will be able to buy fingers.