Cool idea though.
Cool idea though.
The scamming that happens to homebuyers is not even comparable to the risk in uploading docs to a website which promises they won't share user data with anyone. This is genuinely a pro buyer tool with no association with any 3rd party.
The tool has already helped many people negotiate and get a better deal on their mortgage. Please before judging understand that 70% of buyers overpay in their mortgage 1-3% in closing costs and bad rates. It's mind boggling how much lenders get away with profiting in junk fees from stressed out homebuyers.
A business is not just about the product.
Your Privacy Policy. There is no default way to download it (see 9.), and since it is window-ed cannot print entire doc. That means I cannot keep a copy of it for myself.
> We collect the following types of information:
> Mortgage Documents: Loan Estimates and Closing Disclosures you upload for analysis.
Okay, but
> 4. Data Security
> We implement industry-standard security measures to protect your information from unauthorized access, disclosure, alteration, and destruction.
This means nothing. Are you ISO 27001:2022, NIST SP 800-53, CIS, CE+, Essential Eight, or something else? Have you been audited, and proof? Who is your ISP? What regs do you follow around data sovereignty?
Terms of Service. Again, no default way of download. Overall, I would never agree to this ToS. It demands all kinds of requirements on the user, but takes no responsibility for anything - or as described above, explain how you will protect your customers.
You have no reference anywhere where you are geographically. No address, no about us, no who you are. I would be very leery on uploading anything.
Yes many banks charge $30 or more for a wire transfer, but I'd rather just pay the $60 than have a large sum wire transfer lost, stolen, etc.
Some banks/Brokerages are sane and do not charge extra for wire transfers. Fidelity is one such. BOA also(if you have enough assets there, $100k will do it).
Their aggressive dismissal of the concern is not a good look.
If you have suggestions more than "don't trust this random internet tool even if it gives you free advice, regardless of the value it offers", please let me know [thanks emoji]
A great analogy would be a website that asks users to provide their usernames and passwords for sites to see if it’s a strong password or if it’s been compromised. “Sorry, the credentials stouset / hunter2 were found in our database for Hacker News.”
Sure maybe you’re a saint and don’t store or misuse this data. But such a site would in the best case be training users to do a very wrong and dangerous thing. In the worst case you get breached by attackers who do use the collected data to do evil.
This is actually a really good analogy because it does illustrate that it's not a completely crazy ask—people do trust Troy Hunt to run such a site. But OP should be much more understanding of how dangerous the concept is and offer options to resolve concerns (Troy allows downloading the passwords list to check locally), especially while they're not Troy Hunt-level famous and still are trying to build up trust.
This is actually uploading all the information to the backend and storing it in a database. Like a page that is asking for a service URL, a username, a password, a TOTP secret, sending it all to the server, and having the server check if the credentials have been pwned and saving it all.