> Well, the fact that banks traditionally allow reverting fraudulent transactions is becoming more and more of a unique selling point.
Playing fast and loose with security because the bank will be on the hook (at financial cost to the bank) does not seem like a moral or ethical thing to do, and banks would be likely to pull transaction reversion from anyone who tried to use it as a feature.
On the contrary, the fact that services like Plaid are able to exist, indicates otherwise. If banks had a problem with the implementation, they would send cease and desists.
Playing fast and loose with security because the bank will be on the hook (at financial cost to the bank) does not seem like a moral or ethical thing to do, and banks would be likely to pull transaction reversion from anyone who tried to use it as a feature.