Who Made Passwords Even More Painful? | Users Speak Out on New Security Feature

A growing chorus of frustrated Revolut users is raising eyebrows over the recent mandatory screen lock security feature. Many are questioning the need for an extra layer of protection when they've already set a six-digit PIN for their accounts. Could this be more than just an inconvenience?

Context: Security or Overkill?

As financial apps become more stringent about user security, the introduction of a mandatory screen lock for apps like Revolut has sparked debate. Users argue that their sensitive data is already secured by existing PINs within the app. This new requirement feels redundant — akin to locking a safe inside a room that already has its own lock.

Many users express frustration, insisting they should have the option to bypass additional security if they feel their device is secure. “Just why should I need to unlock my phone twice?” questioned one user, echoing a sentiment felt by many. With a plethora of important apps on their devices, they see mandatory screen locks as unnecessary, particularly those who maintain additional security measures for their devices.

Interestingly, some users point out that their app functionality was just fine without the added screen lock in prior updates. "If I can manage transactions without it before, why change now?" lamented another user, stirring up a discussion on whether this is just a regulatory move or a genuine security enhancement.

User Sentiment: Frustration or Understanding?

A mix of frustration and confusion pulses through community feedback. Many insist that a financial institution like Revolut should prioritize user experience while maintaining robust security. The remarks show clear disagreement over whether the move genuinely adds security or hinders access to their funds.

One user pointed out an established banking protocol: "The least security feature all banks are required to have is a PIN confirmation or SMS code before a transfer." This suggests that the screen lock might not actually amplify security as it prompts.

"This is like having you money in a secure safe and locking it in a room with a less safe lock."
— Notable comment reflecting user frustration

Community Concerns and Current Status

The community appears divided, with many pushing back against the so-called enhancement while others show acceptance of strict security measures as a norm. As the conversation continues, users are eager to find solutions that might enable them to disable this double-security requirement.

Key Takeaways

• 🔐 Security Measures: Users see mandatory screen locks as redundant when a PIN already exists.

• 🛡️ User Experience: Concerns grow over accessibility versus security; many describe it as cumbersome.

• 📞 Regulatory Overreach?: Questions arise about whether this is a regulatory guideline or merely an internal policy choice.

As debates unfold around this new feature, users remain inquiring about possible settings to adjust their security preferences, raising the question: Is there a way to maintain security while promoting ease of access?