Posted on 02/06/2017 2:08:48 PM PST by Red Badger
It’s a tiny chip that elicits big opinions.
Meant to protect customers from credit card fraud, most cards now have security chips, and many businesses bought the chip readers to go with it. But more than a year after they became common place, research shows that identity theft is actually up.
“With all the credit card hacking and privacy invasion, I think it’s a fantastic idea,” said one consumer.
Not so, said another. “It holds you up. It’s annoying.”
Consumers and businesses switched to the chip-based cards and readers 16 months ago to deter theft. But a study released this week from Javelin Strategy and Research found that identity fraud cases rose 16 percent in 2016, which equates to 15.4 million new victims – a record high. Lane Conner, founder and CEO of credit card processor Fuze said the chip rollout was bungled from the start, in part because it was supposed to require a pin – not just a signature.
“The real security was supposed to be the pin and actually putting your pin in when you actually dip the card,” he said. “A bad guy could just as easily steal your wallet, go and dip a credit card into a machine and sign for it like they’re you as you could swiping a card.
He also said the increase in e-commerce is to blame, since online shopping offers virtually no credit card protection. For business owner kory helfman of ken’s man’s shop, the spike in fraud cases is concerning.
“It scares me as a business owner, not only for our store but also for our clientele. No one wants to come under any kind of fraud,” he said.
But overall Conner is comfortable with the protection the chip readers gives. And that’s a good thing given the chip is here to stay.
“As badly as it was done, the ship has sailed on ever going back to swiping cards,” said Conner.
Lots of places don’t even require a signature. Just shove the chip in the reader, wait for about a minute, and get your receipt and leave.
Exactly
they do cut down on the type of thief where a sale transaction # is stolen on internet. But the chip only issues a transaction # that is used once. However, I’ve signed the machines in the US w/ Donald Duck and Donald Trump on numerous occasions and never been denied. Try it.
The full capabilities of the card are not being used when a PIN is not required.
Interesting quirk on the debit card. $35 was taken from my wife’s debit card for a purchase of about $8. When you go to the bank you find out there is a $35 fee for you to do anything about it.
That’s a function of your issuing bank. All debit cards required the PIN number when being run as a debit card, credit cards didn’t. It sounds like your new card is being run as a credit card and your issuing bank does not require the PIN be used under a certain amount.
The so called extra security from a chip is only available IF there is a PON associated with the purchase. It is not about cash back. It is about how the identifiers on each purchase works
And that was the whole point.
There are pluses and minuses to doing that. My wife and I still get cash to use at the smaller retail stores and restaurants. The thing is, criminals go after the bigger opportunities (Target, Office Max, Home Depot, etc.).
No, the CREDIT card customers are immune from any responsibilities. If the customer timely reports the card lost or stolen, customer liability is capped at $50. And many issuers will eat that first $50. Generally, the bank will get stuck, but they might try to recover from the merchant in some cases, depending on the size of the loss, merchant culpability, and the customer relationship itself.
Rules are different for debit cards, which is why I won't use one. Although, again, the bank will sometimes eat the customer's share of liability or share the loss and treat it like a credit card loss.
A while ago Citibank had credit cards with your photo on them. That might be an extra level against unauthorized use.
That’s a function of your bank - not industry standard.
I never said they weren't. There are four parts of a credit card transaction with a company like VISA: (1) VISA, (2) the financial institution issuing the VISA credit card, (3) the merchant, and (4) the consumer. VISA has literally ZERO responsibilities in any fraud case. The consumer rarely gets stuck with any liability. It generally falls to the card issuer and the merchant. Despite the rules, you would be surprised how many times the card issuer gets stuck with the "bill" behind the scenes.
Can’t think of a minus.
Crooks use card skimmers to read the magnetic strip, then duplicate your credit card or sell the info.
There is sometimes another party between the issuer and the customer. For small community banks, their name may be on the card, but they are only fronting for the real issuer. That’s why some customer service calls are answered with something like ‘Bankcard Services’. Until they get your name and account number, they don’t even know who you bank with.
And that function of the bank is what the entity fraudulently taking that $35 knew about. A friend who had a different bank had the same op pulled on him for the same amount.
Perceptive on your part to catch the non sequitur. Most people would not for two reasons: they hate the chip and they don’t reason well. They’re the same kind of people who will now accuse you of living the chip and calling them stupid.
“Crooks use card skimmers to read the magnetic strip, then duplicate your credit card or sell the info.”
They can’t duplicate the information which is on the chip that way, which is why “Chip and PIN” was introduced.
However, even in Canada it is generally possible to use a card only with swiping the mag stripe, even with a card that has the chip. Presumably this is so that one can still use the card that way in the event that the chip can’t be read.
Thanks.
I suspect the major avenues of identity theft were never so much about the physical cards in our possession, as other methods of data collection or physical cards that were stolen.
I do believe these cards are better. Some folks mistrust new technology.
Sometimes they are right to. LOL
Take care.
Chip cards aren’t the problem per se...but they just increase cost for everyone w/o much benefit since they left out the “PIN” part of “Chip & PIN” (we are “Chip & Signature”) AND they left the mag stripe on there to be easily duplicated and used on a clone card on a non-chip terminal. The chip did add some security in the internals of the readers (encrypted x-actions) and once every merchant in the USA buys a new terminal (millions/billions of $??) the mag stripe fraud will be eliminated.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.