Natwest data breach?

GT732

eskbanker said:

GT732 said:
What am explaining is something rather straightforward... A card unused for two years, yet again with the same bank. I have several other bank accounts and cards and to date never had a single issue with them in relation to suspicious attempts let alone successful ones and with those cards I used thousands of times online and offline. Yet a card I don't use (key word don't) is compromised.

So your conclusion is that fraud on one card and not others must signify a data breach at the bank concerned - you really can't contemplate any of the other possibilities?

GT732 said:
The story you mention is published, there are cases that go unheard. in every organisation there's always someone bent that loves a backhander or sell data and if you think this can't happen unless it's published then that's down to your lack of acumen not mine. 

Where did I say that or anything close to it?  I specifically clarified that "I'm not saying there can't be data leaks, and certainly there'll be more relevant ones than in that old story above", but my point remains that there are a range of possibilities here, rather than the one you seem to have decided on....

You seem to wish to assume on others but when others do that you throw dummy out of the pram.

 Once again, same bank, different card with the second card not used for two years. The question is, why does it keep happening with this bank and not others?? It's a very simple scenario. A 5 year old could piece it together if you can't yet you seem to constantly think other scenarios, once again why doesn't it happen with the several other banks that I have accounts with? Simple scenario but you're hell bent on your view. 

eskbanker

GT732 said:

eskbanker said:

GT732 said:
What am explaining is something rather straightforward... A card unused for two years, yet again with the same bank. I have several other bank accounts and cards and to date never had a single issue with them in relation to suspicious attempts let alone successful ones and with those cards I used thousands of times online and offline. Yet a card I don't use (key word don't) is compromised.

So your conclusion is that fraud on one card and not others must signify a data breach at the bank concerned - you really can't contemplate any of the other possibilities?

GT732 said:
The story you mention is published, there are cases that go unheard. in every organisation there's always someone bent that loves a backhander or sell data and if you think this can't happen unless it's published then that's down to your lack of acumen not mine. 

Where did I say that or anything close to it?  I specifically clarified that "I'm not saying there can't be data leaks, and certainly there'll be more relevant ones than in that old story above", but my point remains that there are a range of possibilities here, rather than the one you seem to have decided on....

You seem to wish to assume on others but when others do that you throw dummy out of the pram.

 Once again, same bank, different card with the second card not used for two years. The question is, why does it keep happening with this bank and not others?? It's a very simple scenario. A 5 year old could piece it together if you can't yet you seem to constantly think other scenarios, once again why doesn't it happen with the several other banks that I have accounts with? Simple scenario but you're hell bent on your view. 

Ignoring all the silly stuff there, the answer to your questions is 'coincidence' (you previously said it had happened twice, not 'keeps happening'), but no doubt you'll continue to believe otherwise.

Look at it from the bank's point of view - if there was a data breach, resulting in significant quantities of card details being disclosed, then they'd quickly be aware of that, and the consequences of them having to reimburse large amounts of money, and would naturally take proactive actions to contain the issue.  Earlier in the year, one of my credit card providers felt the need to contact an undisclosed volume of cardholders to arrange for their cards to be replaced, which could have signified a data breach, so they can and do happen, but it's quite the extrapolation to assume that an individual fraudulent transaction (or two) must mean a breach!

However, if you're immovably convinced that NatWest leaks like a sieve and all other banks are secure, then obviously vote with your feet....

Emily_Joy

@eskbanker thank you for your explanations. I was rather surprised when I received an sms from Nationwide saying they blocked a suspicious transaction on a card that was not used for 2 years... it seems rather common. 

Ergates

GT732 said:

Ergates said:

GT732 said:
If a device is not connected to the Internet or a mobile phone signal how does it update or receive instant live data?

It doesn't.

GT732 said:
If something is preprogrammed and linked to your account to give certain denominations it won't be that difficult to crack. 

You, clearly, have absolutely no idea how such systems works.  Why on earth would you imagine you are in any way qualified to say how easy or hard they are to crack?

Did I say i am qualified? You seem to jump to conclusions. You have poor attitude. It's not rocket science is it on how these systems work is it? A pre programmed calculator will have so may denominations. In fact they don't even issue a new one with a new card. For you it might be rocket science but for me it isn't. 

I'm not jumping to any conclusions.   The things you *keep repeating* very clearly indicate that you don't know how they work.  That you think the thing is a "preprogrammed calculator" with "so many denominations" tells me this.

This is the Dunning-Kruger effect in action.

expectless

Another coincidence and or unexplained transaction with NW debit card. 

Unused, securely stored, fraudulently used for Amazon transaction. How would anyone get the number and security code other than from the bank? Or does Amazon not need expiry date or 3 digits or address or name?

Name and Card number and address only on NW or Experian or Equifax databases. Have they all suffered data breaches within the last 3 years?

Zanderman

expectless said:

Another coincidence and or unexplained transaction with NW debit card. 

Unused, securely stored, fraudulently used for Amazon transaction. How would anyone get the number and security code other than from the bank? Or does Amazon not need expiry date or 3 digits or address or name?

Name and Card number and address only on NW or Experian or Equifax databases. Have they all suffered data breaches within the last 3 years?

As suggested in posts above, this is likely to be the result of a large-scale card number guessing system.  A data breach is unlikely to be the cause.  Indeed there has probably been no data breach at all. 

And, re Amazon, they do not require the 3 digit code.  

born_again

Screenager said:

I had a data breach last week when I switched my bank, they somehow entered the wrong house number on my account, despite addressing my online letters to the right address. They issued my card and pin to the wrong address. They gave me £100 as compensation.

That's not a data breech.. That is human error 🤦‍♀️

born_again

eskbanker said:

GT732 said:

eskbanker said:

GT732 said:
What am explaining is something rather straightforward... A card unused for two years, yet again with the same bank. I have several other bank accounts and cards and to date never had a single issue with them in relation to suspicious attempts let alone successful ones and with those cards I used thousands of times online and offline. Yet a card I don't use (key word don't) is compromised.

So your conclusion is that fraud on one card and not others must signify a data breach at the bank concerned - you really can't contemplate any of the other possibilities?

GT732 said:
The story you mention is published, there are cases that go unheard. in every organisation there's always someone bent that loves a backhander or sell data and if you think this can't happen unless it's published then that's down to your lack of acumen not mine. 

Where did I say that or anything close to it?  I specifically clarified that "I'm not saying there can't be data leaks, and certainly there'll be more relevant ones than in that old story above", but my point remains that there are a range of possibilities here, rather than the one you seem to have decided on....

You seem to wish to assume on others but when others do that you throw dummy out of the pram.

 Once again, same bank, different card with the second card not used for two years. The question is, why does it keep happening with this bank and not others?? It's a very simple scenario. A 5 year old could piece it together if you can't yet you seem to constantly think other scenarios, once again why doesn't it happen with the several other banks that I have accounts with? Simple scenario but you're hell bent on your view. 

Ignoring all the silly stuff there, the answer to your questions is 'coincidence' (you previously said it had happened twice, not 'keeps happening'), but no doubt you'll continue to believe otherwise.

Look at it from the bank's point of view - if there was a data breach, resulting in significant quantities of card details being disclosed, then they'd quickly be aware of that, and the consequences of them having to reimburse large amounts of money, and would naturally take proactive actions to contain the issue.  Earlier in the year, one of my credit card providers felt the need to contact an undisclosed volume of cardholders to arrange for their cards to be replaced, which could have signified a data breach, so they can and do happen, but it's quite the extrapolation to assume that an individual fraudulent transaction (or two) must mean a breach!

However, if you're immovably convinced that NatWest leaks like a sieve and all other banks are secure, then obviously vote with your feet....

Visa & Mastercard send out lists of cards that have been known to have been part of data breeches @ retailers. Have had the pleasure of calling people to explain this.
Such as like the BA case. 

General_Grant

born_again said:

eskbanker said:

GT732 said:

eskbanker said:

GT732 said:
What am explaining is something rather straightforward... A card unused for two years, yet again with the same bank. I have several other bank accounts and cards and to date never had a single issue with them in relation to suspicious attempts let alone successful ones and with those cards I used thousands of times online and offline. Yet a card I don't use (key word don't) is compromised.

So your conclusion is that fraud on one card and not others must signify a data breach at the bank concerned - you really can't contemplate any of the other possibilities?

GT732 said:
The story you mention is published, there are cases that go unheard. in every organisation there's always someone bent that loves a backhander or sell data and if you think this can't happen unless it's published then that's down to your lack of acumen not mine. 

Where did I say that or anything close to it?  I specifically clarified that "I'm not saying there can't be data leaks, and certainly there'll be more relevant ones than in that old story above", but my point remains that there are a range of possibilities here, rather than the one you seem to have decided on....

You seem to wish to assume on others but when others do that you throw dummy out of the pram.

 Once again, same bank, different card with the second card not used for two years. The question is, why does it keep happening with this bank and not others?? It's a very simple scenario. A 5 year old could piece it together if you can't yet you seem to constantly think other scenarios, once again why doesn't it happen with the several other banks that I have accounts with? Simple scenario but you're hell bent on your view. 

Ignoring all the silly stuff there, the answer to your questions is 'coincidence' (you previously said it had happened twice, not 'keeps happening'), but no doubt you'll continue to believe otherwise.

Look at it from the bank's point of view - if there was a data breach, resulting in significant quantities of card details being disclosed, then they'd quickly be aware of that, and the consequences of them having to reimburse large amounts of money, and would naturally take proactive actions to contain the issue.  Earlier in the year, one of my credit card providers felt the need to contact an undisclosed volume of cardholders to arrange for their cards to be replaced, which could have signified a data breach, so they can and do happen, but it's quite the extrapolation to assume that an individual fraudulent transaction (or two) must mean a breach!

However, if you're immovably convinced that NatWest leaks like a sieve and all other banks are secure, then obviously vote with your feet....

Visa & Mastercard send out lists of cards that have been known to have been part of data breeches @ retailers. Have had the pleasure of calling people to explain this.
Such as like the BA case. 

I wonder who trousered the profits.

Middle_of_the_Road

General_Grant said:

born_again said:

eskbanker said:

GT732 said:

eskbanker said:

GT732 said:
What am explaining is something rather straightforward... A card unused for two years, yet again with the same bank. I have several other bank accounts and cards and to date never had a single issue with them in relation to suspicious attempts let alone successful ones and with those cards I used thousands of times online and offline. Yet a card I don't use (key word don't) is compromised.

So your conclusion is that fraud on one card and not others must signify a data breach at the bank concerned - you really can't contemplate any of the other possibilities?

GT732 said:
The story you mention is published, there are cases that go unheard. in every organisation there's always someone bent that loves a backhander or sell data and if you think this can't happen unless it's published then that's down to your lack of acumen not mine. 

Where did I say that or anything close to it?  I specifically clarified that "I'm not saying there can't be data leaks, and certainly there'll be more relevant ones than in that old story above", but my point remains that there are a range of possibilities here, rather than the one you seem to have decided on....

You seem to wish to assume on others but when others do that you throw dummy out of the pram.

 Once again, same bank, different card with the second card not used for two years. The question is, why does it keep happening with this bank and not others?? It's a very simple scenario. A 5 year old could piece it together if you can't yet you seem to constantly think other scenarios, once again why doesn't it happen with the several other banks that I have accounts with? Simple scenario but you're hell bent on your view. 

Ignoring all the silly stuff there, the answer to your questions is 'coincidence' (you previously said it had happened twice, not 'keeps happening'), but no doubt you'll continue to believe otherwise.

Look at it from the bank's point of view - if there was a data breach, resulting in significant quantities of card details being disclosed, then they'd quickly be aware of that, and the consequences of them having to reimburse large amounts of money, and would naturally take proactive actions to contain the issue.  Earlier in the year, one of my credit card providers felt the need to contact an undisclosed volume of cardholders to arrange for their cards to be replaced, which could have signified a data breach, so they can and do happen, but it's quite the extrapolation to assume that an individual fraudulent transaction (or two) must mean a breach!

However, if you're immovably convinced that NatWest leaks like a sieve and all other banks are secure, then obviously vote with your feet....

Visa & Mastercard send out lists of cards that have been known to have been part of data breeches @ retailers. Have had the pleasure of calling people to explain this.
Such as like the BA case. 

I wonder who trousered the profits.

They should be suspended