191–200 of 221 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If they did that, then there would be no incentive for customers to choose arbitration over filing a dispute with their credit card.
Arbitration is likely even more expensive than a dispute.
We've been hit by this at work as well. We had to add CAPTCHA and a several other techniques to defend against this. How it works: 1. Attacker leases 1 or more premium rate numbers in an international country. - Attacker can lease a premium rate number for as little as $10/month - Typically, the attacker gets to keep 70% of the money generated by the premium rate number. 2. Attacker then finds companies with OTP (One…
Hmmmm... haven't encountered that phrase before.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They could, but customers could then file complaints with the FTC and their state’s attorney general for the fraud Twilio is enabling. I strongly encourage Twilio customers to pursue this route if Twilio is charging them for fraudulent charges.
Further, the customer has the right to dispute credit card charges thanks to the agreement between customer and card provider and between card provider and merchant . Twilio will get in trouble with Visa/Mastercard if customers say Twilio is dropping them for disputes the card provider finds in the customers' favor.
This isn't true. Visa/Mastercard care about your chargeback rate. You can block a customer who's done a chargeback. I'm sure the card networks have rules around what you cannot do as a result of a chargeback but you can stop providing services to a customer who has done a chargeback.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
These filings may add up to change at some later time, though are unlikely to provide any kind of near-term actionable remedy.
If they lose the contract with their credit card company... I see people jumping out of windows at the Twilio HQ. That’s like nuclear meltdown.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If they lose the contract with their credit card company... I see people jumping out of windows at the Twilio HQ. That’s like nuclear meltdown.
To lose the ability to process MasterCard or Visa credit cards takes a few months. You can rack up big fines during that time though. If they get put into the probation period that would raise red flags with some execs, assuming people are communicating these things.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It isn't just as simple as 'premium rate numbers'. Some of the criminals behind these attacks will have access to the phone network. They'll pick an expensive route, like a range of phone numbers in Georgia (the country) from the USA, and offer a cheaper route to it. The system will start using their route for those calls. They'll accept all calls to that route, get paid, and never actually connect any calls. That gi…
I think you're conflating toll bypass fraud with IRSF. A grey route that never delivered any calls or only a fraction of them would have bad ACD numbers and people would not use that route. With hacked Asterisk/FreePBX boxes people usually call the international numbers described in OP and split the termination fee with some corrupt carrier/intermediary. There is a related fraud where people use the hacked Asterisk/F…
Is this really fraud? Is it fraud to offer any VOIP service, or only when it can connect to the phone network, like Skype?
I guess I could see how it might be against the T&C's of the telecom company, to offer a service that undercuts them, but hardly a criminal act of deception.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Down thread someone pointed out that their API allows you to set a max price: https://www.twilio.com/blog/2015/08/introducing-max-price.ht... Apparently a lot of people could really use that info.
Why is this not set to zero dollars be default?!? I agree with other comments here. $0 is the minimum amount people should be willing to pay if they're not disputing charges or reporting fraud to the credit card networks / regulators. Time is money, after all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Down thread someone pointed out that their API allows you to set a max price: https://www.twilio.com/blog/2015/08/introducing-max-price.ht... Apparently a lot of people could really use that info.
I wonder if this is why I don't get SMS OTP from some apps when I'm abroad and roaming...
Your only power to encourage them to fix this is to do the thing they're begging you not to: dispute the charges . If a threshold of Twilio customers dispute charges, Twilio loses the ability to process credit cards at a lower risk rate, then with all but high risk processors, then may lose the ability to process them at all. If enough of their customers are getting burned, and enough dispute, Twilio would no longer…
You chose to require an SMS OTP for your customers. It is not straightforward at all that the burden of filtering your customers would fall on your provider and not on you -- actually, if the provider you chose does explicitly not provide that filtering, it's effectively on you.
(I have to say that if I were Twilio, I would not have added the "fraud prevention" toggle, because now they can be deemed to be providing that service.)