TalkTalk Hacking

SnowTiger

GingerBob wrote: »

If Amazon don't ever request this info, either when signing up or when ordering, one must ask what use this code is - given that Amazon operate a "OneClick" ordering facility.

Perhaps it means that in cases of fraudulent transactions Amazon always take the hit.

masonic

GingerBob wrote: »

You could be right. However, a couple of days ago I renewed card details with Books Etc, and they did ask for the CVV. Maybe this is just to validate the card and they then ask for it when you order - I can't remember.

If Amazon don't ever request this info, either when signing up or when ordering, one must ask what use this code is - given that Amazon operate a "OneClick" ordering facility.

One would expect that it would be asked for by a business either always or never. It is not mandatory to use the code (as SnowTiger points out, it is probably a requirement of being indemnified against fraud), but, as it is used as evidence that the person making the transaction had the card in their presence at the time an order was placed, it would be fraudulent of any business to supply the code if it was not provided by the customer. As you point out, it is incompatible with a one click ordering system, which is probably why Amazon don't use it.

ChiefGrasscutter

SnowTiger wrote: »

Perhaps it means that in cases of fraudulent transactions Amazon always take the hit.

That's as how I have read about it in the past.
Amazon are big enough and have taken the strategic decision to not use it, and absorb any fraud losses resulting from not using it - while raking in the benefits of as you say the one click order facility/convenience.

p00hsticks

GingerBob wrote: »

You could be right. However, a couple of days ago I renewed card details with Books Etc, and they did ask for the CVV. Maybe this is just to validate the card and they then ask for it when you order - I can't remember.


If Amazon don't ever request this info, either when signing up or when ordering, one must ask what use this code is - given that Amazon operate a "OneClick" ordering facility.

Even if a company asks for the CVV, they are not allowed to permanently store the value. The value can be passed to the issuing bank as part of the transaction authorising process, and the bank will say if the given value matches their records. The merchant can then decide depend on this whether to proceed or reject the transaction. The value itself doesn't form part of the transaction data processed by the credit card company - just an indicator to say if it's been checked and found valid.

The merchant has more protection under the credit card regulations if it has asked for and succesfully validated the CVV with the bank, but if they wish to proceed without it and take the risk it's their choice.

joe134

As along standing TT customer, and paying via DD from san123, I've just set up free Alerts with them via text and e-mail, for transactions.
Just to keep my eye on events, as I only use A/c for interest, but,it's maxed out.

Paul_1977

Any customer of TT with stolen details, I see in the paper today you could get up to £1000 at the company allegedly failed to protect your data, TT could even go bust.

Let this be a wakeup call to other companies, hopefully TT will survive.

Figgerty

Following the Talk Talk Cyber attack the CEO arranged for all their customers a offer with Noddle for credit checking (already free) and free credit alerts which normally costs £20. Many of us signed up for this service whither it makes any difference is yet to be established. My elderly neighbour is also a TT customer and I spoke to her about the type of scams criminals get up to using none or some of your private information. I offered to register her details on Noddle as a precaution.

I entered her details and received an on screen message saying they could not verify or validate her identity. She has a couple of bank accounts and a debit card but has never had a credit card. She has no recent credit history but she has lived at her current address for 30 years and is on the electoral register for the same time. She also has a long history of prompt payment for all her utilities, but it seems this does not count. I'm sure there are many others in her position,

The point of registering with a credit agency in this situation is so they alert you if someone attempts a financial transaction in your name. If she is unable to register then she can not be alerted and because of her age she is more likely to be scammed than a younger person.

Is there any other solution for her or is her lack of credit and simple financial arrangement their own protection?

SnowTiger

Figgerty wrote: »

Following the Talk Talk Cyber attack the CEO arranged for all their customers a offer with Noddle for credit checking (already free) and free credit alerts which normally costs £20. Many of us signed up for this service whither it makes any difference is yet to be established. My elderly neighbour is also a TT customer and I spoke to her about the type of scams criminals get up to using none or some of your private information. I offered to register her details on Noddle as a precaution.

I entered her details and received an on screen message saying they could not verify or validate her identity. She has a couple of bank accounts and a debit card but has never had a credit card. She has no recent credit history but she has lived at her current address for 30 years and is on the electoral register for the same time. She also has a long history of prompt payment for all her utilities, but it seems this does not count. I'm sure there are many others in her position,

The point of registering with a credit agency in this situation is so they alert you if someone attempts a financial transaction in your name. If she is unable to register then she can not be alerted and because of her age she is more likely to be scammed than a younger person.

Is there any other solution for her or is her lack of credit and simple financial arrangement their own protection?

It's possible that the CRAs don't have much information about her, especially as she doesn't have credit. Her bank accounts may not even be reported to the CRA if she's had them a long time because banks didn't ask for permission to do so in the past.

It seems the whole TalkTalk thing was over-egged, mostly by Talktalk itself, and that not very much data was taken. Even the data that was taken isn't particularly useful.

Tell your neighbour to check her bank statements every month and be wary of telephone calls from people she doesn't know. Things she should be doing anyway.

Figgerty

SnowTiger wrote: »

Tell your neighbour to check her bank statements every month and be wary of telephone calls from people she doesn't know. Things she should be doing anyway.

I told her of all the type of scams to watch out for but she feels this Noddle alert would be useful if she misses anything. Blame the Talk Talk CEO for that.

So people up to their eyes in debt will be alerted and the careful elderly will not - despite paying their bills on time etc. It seems to me they should be able to verify her identity much easier than someone who is always changing address. This is just bonkers.

We are all still waiting to hear from TT, if our data was hacked. If she finds she is a victim, is it better to register with Cifas (£20 for 2 years) or will she encounter the same problem as with Noddle. A non person despite being born and living in the country for 73 years, etc. etc

.:wall: .:wall:

masonic

Figgerty wrote: »

It seems to me they should be able to verify her identity much easier than someone who is always changing address. This is just bonkers.

Seems a little odd as you mention she has a couple of bank accounts... but maybe these were opened decades ago and never switched so they don't report to the credit reference agencies. Perhaps this is an opportunity for her to switch to a better account and bag some incentives, while at the same time showing up on the radar. Or, she could take the view that, being unverifiable and with no credit history, she is probably better protected than the rest of us anyway.