Google engineer finds critical security flaw in Windows and makes it public after Microsoft ignored it in the 90-day disclosure policy period. – http://news.softpedia.com/news/Google-Engineer-Finds-Critical-Vulnerability-in-Windows-8-1-Makes-It-Public-468730.shtml via Reddit in Motion
The FBI relied on Flash code from an abandoned Metasploit project called “Decloak” to identify suspects hiding behind the Tor anonymity network.
Answer by Faisal Khan:
If the ACH is being considered as a private ACH, then the banks would have to agree to use the format for message exchange. This could translate to the banks having some input as to how the messages would be exchanged and settlements to be done.
The common assumption here is that one is not trying to fix the existing ACH but rather deploy a new one.
Any entity that is deploying an ACH network, would have to abide by the message formats & protocols in existence. As long as that basic element is satisfied, the banks would be okay with it. Your only issue then would be in signing them up and on-boarding experience.
An ACH is essentially an RTGS (Real-time Gross Settlement) System.
The ACH layer is below (or junior) to the RTGS layer. RTGS systems worldwide have a standard suite of protocols via which they can settle. Most prefer the ATM host protocolformat. Albeit, there are instances where a more proprietary approach can also be taken.
In most instances, you're connecting to middleware of the bank, or commonly known as the channel manager switch.
A typical clearing platform looks like this:
With the clearing engine in place, what essentially needs to be worked out are the operating & settlement mechanics. The more frequently one settles, the less of a paid-up requirement is needed.
If the effort is government driven, then an RFC period would be opened up for banks to provide input and eventually the entity that is responsible for deploying the solution will then probably close the comment round and finalize the specs.