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

Stripe is friendly to “friendly fraud”

gingerlime.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 258 posts

Re: Stripe is friendly to “friendly fraud”

#221

Post by pas »

majora2007 wrote: post #214

One thing that is so painful with Stripe is the Disputes because no matter how much evidence I show, even emails with the user claiming they did it because of X, Y, Z. ToS not upheld, etc, the customer always wins. For me, I do a cheap subscription (4$/mon, first month 2$) and one dispute costs me like 20-30$. So that one person wipes a ton of profit from me. I always try to refund them (but you can't refund a custom…

Does Stripe have any published stats on the ratios? Did any merchant ever won such a Stripe dispute?

Re: Stripe is friendly to “friendly fraud”

#222

Post by BobaFloutist »

nathanmills wrote: post #45
varenc wrote: post #16

> They told me they don’t use evidence of chargeback abuse from one merchant to create cross-merchant fraud signals, or to take action against the customer’s card, email, or other details for other merchants. I'm surprised they were able to get Stripe to actually state all of this clearly. It's nice that Stripe actually communicates details like this. But you can see the logic behind why many other big companies woul…

No, vagueness gets me much more upset, but there's just nothing to write about in those cases.

Then it's probably worth being aware that you're an outlier, because companies sure aren't being vague for the hell of it.

Re: Stripe is friendly to “friendly fraud”

#223

Post by wahnfrieden »

joshstrange wrote: post #217
wahnfrieden wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Use DeviceCheck if iOS app too. Uber does this to ban across accounts

That's an interesting idea. The sad thing is, the money lost through chargebacks is minimal for me in the grand scheme of things but it makes me irate enough to potentially spend the development time (that will never have a positive ROI) on adding in something like this just to stick it to the scammers.

It is at least very simple to implement. It's a simple API. Useful capability for banning abusive users too if you have social elements or other abuse vectors besides payment.

Re: Stripe is friendly to “friendly fraud”

#224

Post by lunchbucket »

mattmaroon wrote: post #204
lunchbucket wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you care about the quality of the site, consider the guidelines about not responding to a bad comment with a worse one and not griping about how HN has gotten terrible or turned into reddit or what there you. Downvote, flag, and move on to better discussion, and you'll spend a lot more time engaging and contributing to good discussions. Contributing to good discussions is the highest leverage way to promote the qu…

Fair point. I think we’ve all tried that and it isn’t working, and pointing out to people they’re being annoying could help. But probably won’t, so you’re probably right.

The odds that someone meaningfully reflects on their behavior when you tell them they're what's wrong with HN are pretty slim. You can substantially increase those odds by being more neutral about it.

It's entirely possible HN is dying, HN won't last forever and dang has said he is very concerned about the direction he sees the commentary going. But it's also entirely possible that the quality waxes and wanes primarily due to internal factors and that political tensions, AI bots and slop submissions, etc are external factors straining HN that will eventually be resolved.

Either way, the "real HN" I find is still here if you look for it, and I have always seen people on here who complain about the quality of the site but when you go to their comment history (I have not looked at your comment history to be clear) you see they're constantly getting into arguments and architecting a miserable experience for themselves. One's experience on HN is largely what they make it.

At any rate I appreciate you considering.

Re: Stripe is friendly to “friendly fraud”

#225

Post by mrguyorama »

gingerlime wrote: post #111
akerl_ wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stripe has a customer's bank saying "the customer says they didn't make this payment" and you saying "the customer told me they did make this purchase and got the item and they're making fun of me". They have no way to know if your evidence is real, any more than the bank has a way to know if their customer's evidence is real. Either one (or both) of you could be full of shit. In that world, what would you like Strip…

What do they feed into their Radar machine learning system? surely there are lots of signals to use here. I'm not saying take only my word and ban this customer forever. But they have my record as a merchant (successful charges, chargebacks, disputes etc), they have the payer record as a consumer (payments, chargebacks etc), when a merchant submits a dispute, they provide evidence. I provided evidence from DHL that t…

According to payment networks, that chargeback was entirely legitimate

That's why it doesn't get fed into any fraud prevention system. Legitimate chargebacks shouldn't be used to prevent transactions.

You are mad that what you claim to be a flagrantly fraudulent chargeback was approved. Who approved that chargeback, because that's where your actual anger should lie. Ban that bank/provider or whatever and move on with your life.

There's no fraud prevention in this. Payment networks purposely side with the customer here, it's a large part of their business. People use credit cards in part because of the safety and security they provide. They aren't going to suddenly abandon that system because you got scammed out of $30. They won't even do it for companies that get scammed out of millions of dollars a year. Ask me how I know.

If you don't like this system, you are free to stop accepting credit cards, and lose all that business. Most merchants are happy to lose money here and there to facilitate their business.

You insist that stripe's antifraud system should be treating this as fraud, but the process that decides what is fraud or not has decided it is not fraud. This should not be automated in any way. No system tries to automate this "problem customer prevention" because it's a million times harder of a problem than just fraud prevention, likely to ban just as many good customers as bad (because of the probabilistic nature of fraud prevention), and not even remotely worth it. Plenty of companies don't even try to fight it, because then at least you save the $20 chargeback fee.

If you have a problem customer who is more trouble than they are worth, YOU ban them. This customer might have never scammed any other merchant, and those merchants don't want to lose good business because you are nettled over getting scammed.

Re: Stripe is friendly to “friendly fraud”

#226

Post by mrguyorama »

gingerlime wrote: post #190
ro_sharp wrote: post #164

All of these may result in you bringing in less $ overall, so it really depends on how much each fraud case costs you, but you could (off the top of my head): - Enable always checking CVV - Require 3DS - Ban a card after N disputes - Ban an email/other identifier after N disputes - Ban certain payment methods, banks etc - Add a visible or invisible captcha to fight automated abuse/card testing I suspect Stripe walks…

None of the technical measures you mentioned are relevant with “friendly fraud”. And that’s exactly the problem that Stripe doesn’t solve. And doesn’t want to help merchants fight against.

Certain 3DS setups would shift fraud liability to the payment network itself. That is the only payment network solution to an entity that will happily sign off on clearly false chargebacks. Then they would themselves be fighting the institution agreeing to sign off on bad chargebacks.

Re: Stripe is friendly to “friendly fraud”

#227

Post by nathanmills »

UqWBcuFx6NV4r wrote: post #212
nathanmills wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, vagueness gets me much more upset, but there's just nothing to write about in those cases.

No. This is what you’re saying because you want to plead your case to find out as much as you can. Saying less works. Everyone knows this, because it’s true. You just don’t like it.

Sounds like your projecting a bit.

Re: Stripe is friendly to “friendly fraud”

#228

Post by nathanmills »

BobaFloutist wrote: post #222
nathanmills wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, vagueness gets me much more upset, but there's just nothing to write about in those cases.

Then it's probably worth being aware that you're an outlier, because companies sure aren't being vague for the hell of it.

They're doing it because of a preceived result, not an actual result.

Re: Stripe is friendly to “friendly fraud”

#229

Post by super256 »

shash7 wrote: post #10

I run a saas and we get this every now and then. As a rule of thumb, when you get a chargeback you need to completely ban the customer from your db. This includes: - card ban - email address ban - fingerprint their access and ban This will save you a lot of hassle when they try to signup/buy your product again and cause you the same amount of grief.

Just force 3d secure, as it shifts the liability to the customer's bank. Most people don't mind opening their banking app on the phone for confirming the transaction if they really want the product for itseprice.

Re: Stripe is friendly to “friendly fraud”

#230

Post by plumeria »

kweks wrote: post #218

Stripe is a payment gateway, not an anti-fraud solution. I'd recommend using services such as wyllo or Signifyd for anti-fraud. They will pre-filter against network intelligence signals, and if they approve the transaction, will guarantee your funds, even if a chargeback is lost, and even if you lose.

Is the usage-based pricing of Signifyd et al cheaper than using 3D secure? What about "micro" transactions?
Post reply on HN