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

Casa Client Case Study: The Tinder Trap

blog.keys.casa

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 211 posts

Re: Casa Client Case Study: The Tinder Trap

#161

Post by user-the-name »

Andrew_nenakhov wrote: post #159
prox wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is really the heart of the matter. On hand , yay, great we can subvert nasty states using cryptocoin, but also could undermine legitimate democracies. Swords cuts both ways. No one can deny the wave of ransomware and cryptocoin are not related. How do we balance it so it can provide a net positive for humanity?

Yeah, nobody ever asked for ransom before cryptocoins. /s Legitimate democracy can't be undermined by an international currency not controlled be the government. In fact, it can be reinforced by it. This issue is very similar to free speech: the good it does by making the government unable to silence political opponents far outweights the harm done by extremists and lunatics of all sorts.

People tried ransomware before cryptocurrencies. Payouts were minuscule compared to what cryptocurrencies are now enabling.

And no, it is not at all similar to free speech. Cryptocurrencies do massive harm - to the environment, to innocent people losing their money to scammers and frauds, and to the entire economy through enabling ransomware - and tiny, tiny amounts of good, which dwindle in comparison to the harm.

Re: Casa Client Case Study: The Tinder Trap

#162

Post by statoshi »

dannyw wrote: post #88

This is such an interesting account. I wonder to what scale this happens. Surely after you get roofied after a tinder date with an attacker draining your crypto accounts, you'd file a police report and maybe we'd hear about it in the media?

It's still pretty rare, but as the space goes mainstream I expect the frequency of such attacks to increase.

Re: Casa Client Case Study: The Tinder Trap

#163

Post by tppiotrowski »

deregulateMed wrote: post #157
tppiotrowski wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You implied that your biggest fear is getting your crypto stolen which implies that you have crypto to steal. From your comment history someone could now attempt to find your real world identity: you use a Samsung phone, you went to engineering school, you run a website, etc.

Gross, I won't buy Samsung products ;)

Security through obscurity. Your crypto is safe :)

Re: Casa Client Case Study: The Tinder Trap

#164

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

vishnugupta wrote: post #150
pelario wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not a fan of crypto, but your argument applies to cash, wish is still widely used (not only by shady people ;) )

> but your argument applies to cash, Right, so it's important to understand the context in which cash is used. The vast majority of cash transactions take place in exchange for goods/services rendered immediately . Like I go to a grocery store, buy a pound of bread and pay cash. So disputes are settled right there and then, merchant and customer talk it out. Also, about 90% of cases ticket size is ~20$ so even if a d…

I think this is really a key insight. The physical nature of cash actually puts limits its fraudulent use cases.

I mean, think of all the movie plot points that center around having a drop point for ransom payments. Remember that scene from Mission Impossible - Ghost Protocol in 2011 where they are doing an exchange and the best form of illicit payment is a bag of diamonds.

Not only does crypto make giant illicit ransom payments feasible on a previously unimaginable scale, it's going to make our movies more boring ;)

Re: Casa Client Case Study: The Tinder Trap

#165

Post by anm89 »

vishnugupta wrote: post #36

I've been working in the payments industry on and off for 15 years. I am yet to work with a payment method that does not support reversal (except for physical cash). As a last resort victims can file chargeback with their issuers or police. To begin with there are several layers of protection built in at acquirer, issuer, network and so on. Almost at each step there's an option to reverse the payment (or issue a comp…

Cash does not have charge backs

Re: Casa Client Case Study: The Tinder Trap

#166

Post by rchaud »

geofft wrote: post #128
rchaud wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Or do their users have to go through the same painful failures? This might actually be the first time for people to learn these lessons. They've been free-riding on the protections that banking regulations provide for all of their lives.

To be fair, they haven't been free -riding. Credit cards force prices up by about 3% for a reason, and checking accounts don't give you market yields for a reason. But yes, for me personally, I much prefer deterministically losing 3% to risking 100% (and incentivizing physical attacks).

Fair point. The only places where you can pay a lower price when using cash is at small convenience stores.

Re: Casa Client Case Study: The Tinder Trap

#167

Post by wmf »

vishnugupta wrote: post #142
celticninja wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Definitely have been cases where they have not been able to reverse transfers of this type, even for huge sums, where they know exactly where the money went ie. the bank and the specific accounts: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bangladesh_Bank_robbery

Right, not having worked with it my knowledge of SWIFT is at a superficial level. So I actually followed Bangladesh heist because it's a fascinating at multiple levels. The net loss was in fact minuscule (in % terms) compared to the attempted amount. Summarising from the article you linked. > ....illegally transfer close to US$1 billion > ..The Federal Reserve Bank of New York blocked..US$850 million > ..with US$20 m…

There have been several proposals that would delay large crypto transactions by 24 hours or require them to be approved by multiple people. In no case are transactions reversed, but the idea is to introduce enough friction that hacking/fraud won't be effective.

Re: Casa Client Case Study: The Tinder Trap

#168

Post by Nursie »

hooplah wrote: post #109
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Are there plans to build equivalent features on Blockchain for crypto currencies? Basically every crypto enthusiast out there touts the non-reversibility of crypto transactions as its primary feature , not a bug, and that is why I see crypto as generally useless for your average person.

It is for merchants. Chargebacks are abused and can kill your profitability in certain industries. Stripe and PayPal label these has high risks and will shut your account down if you receive too many chargebacks. As someone who uses crypto on both ends, I think no reversal is the fairest way. Both sides lie, but the customer lies quite a bit and is usually favored in CC reversals.

We have literally millennia of evidence that merchants are not to be trusted. “Both sides lie” covers a massive power imbalance as well as just ignoring history.

Re: Casa Client Case Study: The Tinder Trap

#169

Post by Nursie »

devit wrote: post #98
vishnugupta wrote: post #36

I've been working in the payments industry on and off for 15 years. I am yet to work with a payment method that does not support reversal (except for physical cash). As a last resort victims can file chargeback with their issuers or police. To begin with there are several layers of protection built in at acquirer, issuer, network and so on. Almost at each step there's an option to reverse the payment (or issue a comp…

Transactions have to be irreversible so that law enforcement is impossible, which is the main selling point of cryptocurrencies. Of course that's a downside if you are the one who would like law enforcement to happen (either because you are the victim of a theft or you want to enforce on others). Also fraud can be done with reversible transactions as well, in particular the reversal can be fraudulent; in general, rev…

Reversible transactions are effective at building trust in situations where you don’t trust the merchant.

If I can reverse a transaction if I get ripped off, I might consider using a smaller or newer vendor. If I can’t then no chance, I’m sticking to the one I trust, even if they don’t have what I want.

Reversible payment methods are a huge boon to merchants, whether they realise it or not.

Re: Casa Client Case Study: The Tinder Trap

#170

Post by Nursie »

kragen wrote: post #152
vishnugupta wrote: post #36

I've been working in the payments industry on and off for 15 years. I am yet to work with a payment method that does not support reversal (except for physical cash). As a last resort victims can file chargeback with their issuers or police. To begin with there are several layers of protection built in at acquirer, issuer, network and so on. Almost at each step there's an option to reverse the payment (or issue a comp…

Payment reversal is an open invitation to criminals to steal from sellers. A friend of mine had his laptop stolen via payment reversal. Listed it on Craigslist for sale, a woman paid by PayPal and then came by to pick it up, and after she left she reversed the payment. PayPal automatically took her side because he didn't have a shipping tracking number. Cashier's-check scams are another classic form of this crime: ht…

Payment non-reversibility is an open invitation to sellers scamming, something which has been recorded for thousands of years.

You’d have to be historically illiterate to want to throw this stuff away.

I’m sorry your friend got scammed, but there’s a host of damn good reasons we put the risk on the seller.

This is not a set of outdated practices resulting in ‘risk’ to sellers, it’s deliberate consumer protection.

Post reply on HN