It is worth considering making one, as this is not the first time this has come up, and just causes the same series of questions and concerns each time.
1 Like
It would be an academic paper about how SHA256 works?
1 Like
I guess, could you make it incredibly easy to understand, for someone with little technical background?
A bit like the Monzo blogs or the FreeTrade blogs.
Often complicated issues, brought down and explained simply.
1 Like
I do think the app is great. And I demonstrated it to someone yesterday who also thought it was great. It was explaining to them that prompted the questions in the first place.
It’s perfectly possible to explain how security works without compromising the system itself. I work in IT and I’m explaining to customers how my company secures their data all the time. Some of the Apple security documents are excellent and easily readable to a lot of people. I’m not suggesting anything so elaborate, but they are a good example.
2 Likes
No, it would be about procedures and systems, and it wouldn’t compromise your security. We don’t need to know how the encryption works because as you say, that would be a technical or academic paper and add very little to our understanding.
Yes, I’ve seen that. So Emma doesn’t store the details as you said previously, but you do have the keys. So where it the decrypted log in information stored when they keys are used? Only at TrueLayer and then they pass the transaction details back to Emma?
I agree with Dave and Nick here - it does not have to be. It is possible to simplify constructs, and use diagrams to illustrate complicated concepts in an easier way.
The key bit missing from that link is the answer to how the above works, rather than the assumption that someone would not also be able to get through TrueLayer’s security.
1 Like
We already have these things and are pretty transparent about everything. I am going to open a ticket so we can increase this section and add more. 
5 Likes
That would be great, and would also save you re-answering questions on a Sunday! For me, it is diagrams that help the most, and I find that true of many people.
2 Likes
That’s a fair point. I do appreciate that @edo1493 was answering questions on a Sunday 
Thank you!
1 Like
I am working. 
So am I Doing for others what you’ve been doing here (answering questions).
1 Like
Thanks for responding. Just to follow up on a couple of things…
For me convenient knowledge of transfers between my accounts isn’t irrelevant or counterproductive. Pretty much all of my transfers are standing orders at various times of the month rather than manually initiated. Having them appear in the ‘All Transactions’ list gives me convenient feedback and peace of mind they have taken place - I don’t make a habit of digging around the Accounts screen on a daily basis so won’t notice them having taken place from there.
Secondly, when I wrote my post I hadn’t realized that the change extends beyond inter-account transfers and that you’ve actually removed all types of Excluded transactions from the All Transactions screen, as pointed out by @glasgow. This I consider an extra disappointment. I mark several transactions as Excluded because I want to exclude them from spending analytics, not because I want to exclude them from the All Transactions feed.
Please consider @glasgow 's earlier suggestions to make it optional (i.e. a single toggle in your settings to show or hide excluded transactions from the All Transactions list).
If you decide not to provide an option, perhaps you need to consider renaming the ‘All Transactions’ list to ‘Non-Excluded Transactions’.
I completely agree with you. That’s why we have called it ‘Summary of all your transactions’ in the new version.
To my mind preceding ‘all transactions’ with ‘summary of’ is not sufficient to get rid of confusion as to what the list actually represents. ‘Summary of’ could mean all transactions are present, just with less detail (that would be my assumption in fact). If its not going to include (or there isn’t going to be a user-setting to include) all transactions and you don’t want to call the list what it actually is (‘non-excluded transactions’), I would suggest you consider getting rid of the word ‘all’ so there is less of an expectation that the list may actually include all transactions.
Thanks for this, we are going to revisit this and find a better way.
1 Like
The overall balance on the accounts page shouldn’t be red if the balance is positive - it goes against all convention - ‘in the red’ means overdrawn.
1 Like
That’s orange, the color of the gradient.
Yay!
