341–350 of 367 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don't care, use my ach info
ABA/DDA are inherently less secure than online access credentials. An account can be directly debited if ABA/DDA are compromised, and they cannot be rotated without closing the account. Plaid tokenizes all this to avoid any potential issues -- and further, if credentials are somehow compromised they can be rotated very easily.
If it's only intended to prevent identity fraud or data theft, then it's really 'security' more than 'privacy'.
I signed up for this. Sadly, it is not what I thought it was and the website does not make it very clear. Basically, this is for online purchases only. To make matters a bit worse, it wants to connect to your real bank account. What we need here is a physical credit card that I can use in the real-world that has a new number on each swipe. Most of my historical fraud has happened because I probably swiped my card at…
If you use Apple Pay then that's exactly what you get. A unique credit card number is generated per transaction and passed to the merchant. Not only is it more secure but it also helps protect your privacy against retailers that use your card number to track your purchases across their brands.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
AVS doesn't deny anything. Its a status code returned on the auth. Its up to the merchant to reverse the auth if AVS data shows it doesn't match(Exact Address,Zip Code, CVV) or send the auth off for settlement. Merchant has almost no recourse if transaction is marked as fraud and the AVS doesn't match.
It may be up to the merchant, technically, but in reality systems such as Authorize.Net allow you to configure it at the gateway to reject transactions based on various AVS criteria. Many of my clients also only allow shipping to the AVS verified billing address as a way to weed out much of the fraud. For many products, only allowing shipping to the billing address is a reasonable restriction.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
AVS doesn't deny anything. Its a status code returned on the auth. Its up to the merchant to reverse the auth if AVS data shows it doesn't match(Exact Address,Zip Code, CVV) or send the auth off for settlement. Merchant has almost no recourse if transaction is marked as fraud and the AVS doesn't match.
It may be up to the merchant, technically, but in reality systems such as Authorize.Net allow you to configure it at the gateway to reject transactions based on various AVS criteria. Many of my clients also only allow shipping to the AVS verified billing address as a way to weed out much of the fraud. For many products, only allowing shipping to the billing address is a reasonable restriction.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
AMEX gift cards => pay cash => leave => enjoy. when paying with said card? provide address, fake name, 3 digit code on back of card "A HAPPY CUSTOMER4U" as name on card. Done.
Thanks for the tip. I'm not familiar with the laws around providing a fake name or address, but it's good to know that's an option. (My concern is that, if there's any kind of issue on the payment processor's end, it seems like the use of the fake identity could be misinterpreted as criminal fraud)
How could that possibly be the case? Who's being defrauded?
Hey HN - Privacy.com co-founder here. I'm really excited to share what we've been working on for the past year and a half or so. We've been neck-deep in payments stuff on the card issuing side (getting a BIN sponsor, ACH origination, etc), so happy to answer any questions on that front as well. P.S. For new users, your first $5 donation to watsi.org is on us :)
Mastercard has this service in quite a few countries, the downside is that usually they do not offer the same insurance as for the normal cerdit card and those cards will not pass an actual credit check. Other issuers, banks, and other organizations (post office for example) also offered similar services. I never really liked these services they don't really support recurring payments, some of them force you to purch…
If you're going to do business with someone, a certain amount of trust is required, and there isn't any working around that with technology. If you don't trust a vendor to refrain from stealing your credit card information, how can you trust them to actually deliver the goods, not spit in your food, honor the warranty, etc, etc? Alternatively, if you do trust them to do those things, trusting them with your credit card number isn't much of a leap, especially given that banks are actually incredibly efficient at identifying and dealing with fraud, if not preventing it outright.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Got a citation on this? I'd love for it to be true, since it'll save me a lot of effort. But WSJ, for instance, requires you to cancel via phone even if you sign up online.
https://usa.visa.com/dam/VCOM/download/about-visa/15-April-2... Section: 5.9.8.2 "Provide an online cancellation procedure if the Cardholder's request for goods or services was initially accepted online"
Looks like they used to have an online form a several years ago, but it went missing. Various blog/forum posts indicate that most people have had no luck getting any sort of response from Visa via mail.