Tagged: Framework Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • user 3:35 am on June 22, 2018 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , , , Framework,   

    Open Banking framework comes to Australia 

    Countries across the world are gradually following in the footsteps of in the UK and PSD2 in the EU, given the vast future potential offered by these schemes. In , the federal government has agreed to implement the recommendations made by the Open Banking Review team chaired by Scott Farrell, for the regulatory under which an Open Banking regime would operate. And initially, the four major in Australia have been mandated to make banking data available to TPPs (third-party providers) by June 2019.

    It is designed to give customers more control over their information, leading to more choice in their banking and more convenience in managing their money—thus resulting in more confidence in the use and value of an asset mostly undiscovered by customers: their data.

    One could consider the UK’s Open Banking technical specification as an example approach. Specific API design principles—such as redirect-based authorization and authentication flow—have been taken as the starting point for setting data transfer and authentication standards in Australia, though these would be adopted only with appropriate considerations.

    Highlights of Australia’s Open API framework

    • The scope of data that must be shared by data holders includes customer-provided data, transaction data and product data (e.g., fees and charges).
    • Value-added customer data or aggregated data sets are not required to be shared.
    • The product range included in the scope is very broad across a large range of deposit and lending products for both retail and business customer segments.
    • Data transfer would be completely free of charge.
    • The data recipient can rely on the outcome of an identity verification assessment performed on the customer by data holders.
    • Tiered accreditation system for data holders and data recipients will be based on the risk of data sets and participants—and with regards to existing license regimes for accreditation—would reduce costs for many participants.
    • Multifactor authentication is considered a reasonable security measure. Any authentication measure adopted should be consistent with authentication requirements in direct interaction between the data holders and their customers.
    • Screen-scraping is not restricted, but the alternative access mechanisms will be made very efficient, which will make screen-scraping redundant.

    Contrary to PSD2 and UK Open Banking, Open Banking in Australia is part of the Consumer Data Right. The CDR will give consumers greater power to control their data—and banking is the first sector in which it will be applied. So, the focus of all the developments is to form a single, broader framework which is interoperable across sectors apart from banking. The Farrell Review has given special consideration to how Open Banking is going to work with existing laws and systems such as the Privacy Act, Competition and Consumer Act 2010, and Anti-Money Laundering law to avoid any uncertainty and ambiguity.

    Other differences include&;

    • Australia’s Open Banking use cases are limited in terms of functionality, as it allows only read access, which limits payments initiation/write-access functionality—unlike UK Open Banking and PSD2, where it is allowed. However, in terms of accounts in scope, Australia includes more accounts (such as lending accounts) while these are not included in UK and PSD2. These are differences in the scope of the use cases:

    • Introduction of Australia Open Banking is divided into phases, starting with four major Australian banks at the outset and the remaining Australian Deposit-taking Institutions (ADIs) to comply within the following year—unless the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) determines a later date for them. In this way, ADIs will be able to benefit from lessons learned through earlier phases. The UK’s Open Banking implementation is not divided and is open to competition for all nine major UK banks from the very beginning. PSD2 is applicable to all banks in the EU that offer online-accessible payment accounts.
    • Australia’s Open Banking framework recommends standardizing APIs for data transfer similar to UK’s framework, while PSD2 leaves it to banks to decide what kind of interface they want to use. For PSD2, initiatives such as the Berlin Group’s NextGenPSD2 aim to close this gap.
    • In Australia, all Open Banking standards (transfer, data, security, and customers’ and participants’ experience) will be set by a Data Standards Body. This is comparable to the UK’s framework with the Open Banking Implementation Entity (OBIE); while in PSD2, standards are not centralized and are comparatively fragmented.
    • In Australia, Open Banking will be supported by multiple regulator models by the ACCC (competition and consumer issues, standards setting), OAIC (privacy protection), ASIC, APRA and RBA and other sector-focused regulators (advice as required). UK is regulated by CMA (for the nine largest banks) with standards set by the UK Open Banking Implementation Entity and regulated by EU’s PSD2 (for all UK banks). In PSD2, National Competent Authorities (NCAs) regulate and control the banks in their national markets with regards to PSD2 compliance.
    • Due to various legal complexities, Australian customers will not have the right to request deletion of their personal information under the Privacy Act, while in UK Open Banking and PSD2, it will be allowed under GDPR implementation.
    • Under the Australian regulation, third parties that participate in Open Banking will also be obliged to share their customer data, which is different from PSD2 and UK Open Banking.

    Australia has taken a very structured approach in planning for Open Banking to work with existing regulations and incorporating lessons learned. It has also addressed considerations such as customer education, dispute resolution, the ACCC breach reporting obligation and post-implementation assessment to make Open Banking more effective in Australia.

    The post Open Banking framework comes to Australia appeared first on Accenture Banking Blog.

    Accenture Banking Blog

  • user 3:35 pm on April 3, 2018 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , compares, Framework, , , , , ,   

    A summary of the new Open API framework in Hong Kong, and how it compares with PSD2 

    Today, Banking is gaining traction globally, through a combination of ’ internal efforts, market initiatives, and regulations like the EU’s and the UK’s CMA Open Banking. Now has also gotten on board, with the Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA)’s launch of its draft Open API .

    Publication of the framework on January 11, 2018 marked the start of a public consultation that will run until March 15, 2018. Responses will feed into a final version that will be binding for the territory’s largest retail banks, although other banks will be able to join in the future.

    So, what are the highlights of the HKMA’s Open API framework? It includes the following goals:

    • Increase the competitiveness of Hong Kong’s banking sector.
    • Generate opportunities to reach out to untapped markets through better customer experience.
    • Define Open API use cases and deployment timeframes.
    • Recommend Open API technical standards.
    • Recommend Open API facilitation measures.

    One of the most interesting aspects of the HKMA’s framework is the splitting of use cases into four phases with different product categories and timelines:

    Phase 1

    Product and Service Information: Third-Party Providers (TPP)’s access to banks’ products information, which is frequently used by customers on a ‘read-only’ basis and thus helping financial product comparison sites. Banks will be expected to implement these APIs within six months of the framework’s finalization.

    Phase 2

    Customer Acquisition/New Applications: Customer acquisition via TPPs and through online applications for credit cards, loans and some insurance products. Banks will be expected to implement this within twelve months of finalization.

    Phase 3

    Account Information: Retrieval of both stand-alone and aggregated account information. It would help TPP services that aggregate multiple accounts or perform analytics to gain customer insights. The timeline for this phase will be discussed later between HKMA and the banks.

    Phase 4

    Transaction Processing: Enabling TPPs to communicate customers&; payment instructions to banks. Again, the timeline will be discussed later between HKMA and the banks.

    Comparing the HKMA’s framework with the Regulatory Technical Standards (RTS) for strong customer authentication (SCA) under PSD2, one of the biggest differences is that the HKMA’s draft is a mixture of a regulatory paper with some initial timelines, recommendations on specific protocols and data formats, and high-level specifications for each product category. PSD2 is -agnostic and does not define any API standards, with other initiatives like Berlin Group and STET stepping in to fill this gap.

    Other differences between HKMA and PSD2:

    Click to view larger

    While HKMA Open API was inspired by Open Banking and PSD2, its approach is visionary—and in many ways, unique. It remains clear that a single API standard is vital for any economy to attract global innovation and avoid fragmentation. This is a lesson that HKMA is well-placed to take on board.

    Click to view larger
    *6 months (Phase 1) and 12 months (Phase 2) after release of the Open API
    **To be reviewed by HKMA and banks for a Phase 3 and 4 timeline


    My thanks to Hakan Eroglu for his research and analysis for this blog.


    The post A summary of the new Open API framework in Hong Kong, and how it compares with PSD2 appeared first on Accenture Banking Blog.

    Accenture Banking Blog

  • user 9:40 pm on September 15, 2016 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , Framework, , , , Veterans   

    Blockchain Veterans Unveil Secure Smart Contracts Framework 

    Two notable developers are releasing an open-source contract security tool.

  • user 5:40 pm on May 28, 2016 Permalink | Reply
    Tags: , , Framework,   

    A Framework for Identity 

    IDEO coLAB member Dan Elitzer explores a for digital using and other technologies.
    fintech techcrunch

compose new post
next post/next comment
previous post/previous comment
show/hide comments
go to top
go to login
show/hide help
shift + esc
Close Bitnami banner