Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Target's EasySweep – Simplifying Skimmer Detection

tech.target.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 151 posts

Re: Target's EasySweep – Simplifying Skimmer Detection

#131

Post by adhesive_wombat »

gorkish wrote: post #109
crote wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ironically, contactless has been the source of new types of skimmer attacks. A skimmer could just add an nfc coil and wouldn't even need to physically touch the card anymore.

Yes by all means, let's use the threat of a possible attack on EMV to continue to prop up the magstrip and completely disregard that pretty much all of the successful attacks against chip or contactless involve legacy magstrip emulation. If it's good enough for Granddad, it's good enough for me!

Welcome to the Internet. If your comment doesn't propose something that is mathematically proven to be perfect under all circumstances and for all people, past, present, future and hypothetical, then it's junk and you're an idiot for mentioning it.

Re: Target's EasySweep – Simplifying Skimmer Detection

#132

Post by aesh2Xa1 »

throwaway2037 wrote: post #128
Animats wrote: post #123

This is only a small part of Target's loss prevention operation. Target is known for being both aggressive and sneaky about loss prevention. They use cameras and face recognition extensively, and they have an in-house forensic lab that can process fingerprints. Sometimes they will let a shoplifter get away with stealing for a while, until the total passes the felony threshold. Then they have them arrested. Sometimes…

Your quoted first paragraph: You make it sounds like this is something bad. What is wrong with Target's actions? I am confused.

Target has the opportunity to correct an individual whose punishment will be a misdemeanor but instead chooses to -escalate- the individual's behavior in order to punish them with a felony.

Imagine that the misdemeanor — a fine and a few months in prison — would sufficiently deter an individual from ever stealing again, or at least from Target. Target's theft problem is resolved, and the individual goes on with a more abiding life.

In the actual case, Target allows this person to believe the theft is easy and rewarding. When Target preps the legal case, this person serves years in prison.

Target has lost additional inventory meanwhile, Target has paid for the case-building, the individual serves a long sentence, and the individual loses future job candidacy.

Society also pays for the prison time and must support an individual with a difficult-to-employ problem. Everybody is worse off.

I didn't read OP's paragraph and think that they intended to make Target sound bad, but I was able to make the case myself, I think.

Re: Target's EasySweep – Simplifying Skimmer Detection

#133

Post by sgarland »

aesh2Xa1 wrote: post #132
throwaway2037 wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your quoted first paragraph: You make it sounds like this is something bad. What is wrong with Target's actions? I am confused.

Target has the opportunity to correct an individual whose punishment will be a misdemeanor but instead chooses to -escalate- the individual's behavior in order to punish them with a felony. Imagine that the misdemeanor — a fine and a few months in prison — would sufficiently deter an individual from ever stealing again, or at least from Target. Target's theft problem is resolved, and the individual goes on with a mor…

Anecdotal counterpoint: there used to be a r/shoplifting sub. Sure, anyone can lie on the internet, but the advice given there was “do not shoplift from Target; you will get caught, and you will suffer.”

Re: Target's EasySweep – Simplifying Skimmer Detection

#134

Post by monkeywork »

kotaKat wrote: post #129
birdman3131 wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Walmart still refuses to go contactless because they went in on the QR code in the app. Annoying.

That’s because Walmart is using Walmart Pay as a vehicle to track you and your shopping purchases. They can’t track your habits the same way with just a card. Kroger finally gave up on Kroger Pay if only because they realized customers were still entering their alternate ID/phone number during checkout so they could still link your data together. The funny part is Walmart in Canada fully allows contactless… almost as…

>The funny part is Walmart in Canada fully allows contactless… almost as if they don’t care they aren’t getting that customer data up there.

No it's because our banking system is dramatically different in Canada and the expectations of the average shopper and the POS options available to them here are all working to force that issue.

Canada had chip and pin and contactless LONG LONG before the US did - and it's easier for us to make these pivots and changes due to fewer banks and pre-defined co-operation agreements.

Re: Target's EasySweep – Simplifying Skimmer Detection

#135

Post by MBCook »

kotaKat wrote: post #129
birdman3131 wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Walmart still refuses to go contactless because they went in on the QR code in the app. Annoying.

That’s because Walmart is using Walmart Pay as a vehicle to track you and your shopping purchases. They can’t track your habits the same way with just a card. Kroger finally gave up on Kroger Pay if only because they realized customers were still entering their alternate ID/phone number during checkout so they could still link your data together. The funny part is Walmart in Canada fully allows contactless… almost as…

I remember Home Depot had contactless off for a long time and I think Target too?

None of them wanted Apple Pay/Google Pay/Samsung Pay to succeed. They wanted their own thing to get out from having to pay credit card fees.

Weren’t they all members of that ridiculous CurrenC project that completely flopped?

Re: Target's EasySweep – Simplifying Skimmer Detection

#136

Post by selykg »

LorenPechtel wrote: post #104
selykg wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My preferred gas station got tap to pay during the pandemic and I make it a clear effort to use it every time I get gas to try to bump the numbers up so it doesn't go away or gets fixed if it breaks. Such a great feature.

Preferred gas station here did something to the UI--you can "pay" by waving your phone at it, but then it will prompt for your zip code. When you enter the zip code there's a couple of prompts about ensuring you know you're paying credit price--oops, entering the zip code also answers no to the first question.

That's real dumb and totally defeats the point. That sucks.

Re: Target's EasySweep – Simplifying Skimmer Detection

#137

Post by aesh2Xa1 »

sgarland wrote: post #133
aesh2Xa1 wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Target has the opportunity to correct an individual whose punishment will be a misdemeanor but instead chooses to -escalate- the individual's behavior in order to punish them with a felony. Imagine that the misdemeanor — a fine and a few months in prison — would sufficiently deter an individual from ever stealing again, or at least from Target. Target's theft problem is resolved, and the individual goes on with a mor…

Anecdotal counterpoint: there used to be a r/shoplifting sub. Sure, anyone can lie on the internet, but the advice given there was “do not shoplift from Target; you will get caught, and you will suffer.”

Is your counterpoint the below? Is it claiming that Target's practices don't or shouldn't work?

"All individuals should know to use /r/shoplifting and are therefore impervious to Target's case-building trap."

Re: Target's EasySweep – Simplifying Skimmer Detection

#138

Post by birdman3131 »

kotaKat wrote: post #129
birdman3131 wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Walmart still refuses to go contactless because they went in on the QR code in the app. Annoying.

That’s because Walmart is using Walmart Pay as a vehicle to track you and your shopping purchases. They can’t track your habits the same way with just a card. Kroger finally gave up on Kroger Pay if only because they realized customers were still entering their alternate ID/phone number during checkout so they could still link your data together. The funny part is Walmart in Canada fully allows contactless… almost as…

They still track it a fair bit. For example. Put a card in the walmart app and after a bit of time all your past purchases will show up in your history.

Re: Target's EasySweep – Simplifying Skimmer Detection

#139

Post by sangnoir »

tyoma wrote: post #130
sangnoir wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are correct: but I think all these measures are in place because liability is placed on financial institutions rather than individual victims. The owners of the payment infrastructure are correctly motivated to holistically solve the problem, unlike in the US were the person woth the least power and control is burdened with having to contend with "Identity theft" and losing money by default to make up for the fra…

This is plainly untrue. The US has an absurdly consumer friendly legal environment; you simply say you didn’t do the transaction and your money is immediately refunded; it is up to the payment infra to eat the losses. The reason mag stripe and associated technologies stuck around is precisely because US banks were good enough at real-time fraud detection that the cost of fraud was And identity theft is absolutely a t…

> The US has an absurdly consumer friendly legal environment; you simply say you didn’t do the transaction and your money is immediately refunded;

US consumer laws don't hold a candle to European ones - it's not even close.

Have you ever gone through this process yourself, or are you stating the idealized version of what should happen? I'd like to hear the bank you were dealing with, because mine tried to give me the run around ("It's not fraudulent because your PIN was used"), and I had to fight them over many calls to get a "temporary refund" by threatening to involve a state ombudsman. Later on, I got a letter in the mail that said the investigation was complete, and the refund was now permanent, only to have the refund yanked again months later.

Caping for American banks in this day and age is weird. They are mostly terrible and will rather have their clients take the financial hit before they do - even if they have to lie or frustrated you with long holds & multiple calls unless you show them you mean business.

Re: Target's EasySweep – Simplifying Skimmer Detection

#140

Post by sgarland »

aesh2Xa1 wrote: post #137
sgarland wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Anecdotal counterpoint: there used to be a r/shoplifting sub. Sure, anyone can lie on the internet, but the advice given there was “do not shoplift from Target; you will get caught, and you will suffer.”

Is your counterpoint the below? Is it claiming that Target's practices don't or shouldn't work? "All individuals should know to use /r/shoplifting and are therefore impervious to Target's case-building trap."

No, my counterpoint is that Target’s strategy seems to have worked, and also that there exists the possibility that someone would opt to not shoplift at all due to the harsher penalties set by Target, and being unsure how widespread that practice is.

To be clear, I think the actual problem with shoplifting is systemic suppressed wages coupled with inflation and arbitrary price hikes by corporations.

Post reply on HN