Interesting:

https://thestack.com/security/2016/0...uses-facebook-
furore/

Obviously public transport is a prime place for this to happen given the
crowding but a couple of things:

- Surely a POS terminal is linked to a traceable bank account which means as
soon as someone complains then the games up isn't it? Unless they're
even set the bank account and POS account up as another unsuspecting victim.
- Wifi doesn't work well in the tube. Though LU have helpfully put it in most
(all?) underground stations now so I guess thats not an issue.

--
Spud

In message , at 14:20:03 on Thu, 18 Feb
2016, d remarked:
Interesting:

https://thestack.com/security/2016/0...uses-facebook-
furore/

Obviously public transport is a prime place for this to happen given the
crowding but a couple of things:

- Surely a POS terminal is linked to a traceable bank account which means as
soon as someone complains then the games up isn't it? Unless they're
even set the bank account and POS account up as another unsuspecting victim.
- Wifi doesn't work well in the tube. Though LU have helpfully put it in most
(all?) underground stations now so I guess thats not an issue.

Or just keep your contactless card in your wallet next to an Oyster, and
the "card clash" will ensure neither can be read.
--
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 14:20:03 on Thu, 18 Feb
2016, d remarked:
Interesting:

https://thestack.com/security/2016/0...uses-facebook-
furore/

Obviously public transport is a prime place for this to happen given the
crowding but a couple of things:

- Surely a POS terminal is linked to a traceable bank account which means
as
soon as someone complains then the games up isn't it? Unless they're
even set the bank account and POS account up as another unsuspecting
victim.
- Wifi doesn't work well in the tube. Though LU have helpfully put it in
most
(all?) underground stations now so I guess thats not an issue.

Or just keep your contactless card in your wallet next to an Oyster, and
the "card clash" will ensure neither can be read.

Why would you let someone walk up to you and place a POS terminal on the
pocket containing your wallet (and then not punch him in the face
afterwards)?

tim

In message , at 19:42:30 on Thu, 18 Feb
2016, tim... remarked:
https://thestack.com/security/2016/0...uses-facebook-
furore/

Obviously public transport is a prime place for this to happen given the
crowding but a couple of things:

- Surely a POS terminal is linked to a traceable bank account which
means as
soon as someone complains then the games up isn't it? Unless they're
even set the bank account and POS account up as another
unsuspecting victim.
- Wifi doesn't work well in the tube. Though LU have helpfully put it
in most
(all?) underground stations now so I guess thats not an issue.

Or just keep your contactless card in your wallet next to an Oyster,
and the "card clash" will ensure neither can be read.

Why would you let someone walk up to you and place a POS terminal on
the pocket containing your wallet (and then not punch him in the face
afterwards)?

It'd be inside a backpack, and while I'd like to punch people in the
face whose backpacks commonly thump into my torso, it's likely to
escalate badly.
--
Roland Perry

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 19:42:30 on Thu, 18 Feb 2016,
tim... remarked:
https://thestack.com/security/2016/0...uses-facebook-
furore/

Obviously public transport is a prime place for this to happen given the
crowding but a couple of things:

- Surely a POS terminal is linked to a traceable bank account which
means as
soon as someone complains then the games up isn't it? Unless they're
even set the bank account and POS account up as another unsuspecting
victim.
- Wifi doesn't work well in the tube. Though LU have helpfully put it in
most
(all?) underground stations now so I guess thats not an issue.

Or just keep your contactless card in your wallet next to an Oyster, and
the "card clash" will ensure neither can be read.

Why would you let someone walk up to you and place a POS terminal on the
pocket containing your wallet (and then not punch him in the face
afterwards)?

It'd be inside a backpack,

doesn't seem to be an overly certain way to catch someone's wallet pocket,
to me

tim

tim... wrote:

"Roland Perry" wrote in message
...
In message , at 19:42:30 on Thu, 18 Feb 2016,
tim... remarked:
https://thestack.com/security/2016/0...uses-facebook-
furore/

Obviously public transport is a prime place for this to happen given the
crowding but a couple of things:

- Surely a POS terminal is linked to a traceable bank account which
means as
soon as someone complains then the games up isn't it? Unless they're
even set the bank account and POS account up as another unsuspecting
victim.
- Wifi doesn't work well in the tube. Though LU have helpfully put it in
most
(all?) underground stations now so I guess thats not an issue.

Or just keep your contactless card in your wallet next to an Oyster, and
the "card clash" will ensure neither can be read.

Why would you let someone walk up to you and place a POS terminal on the
pocket containing your wallet (and then not punch him in the face
afterwards)?

It'd be inside a backpack,

doesn't seem to be an overly certain way to catch someone's wallet pocket,
to me

It doesn't need to be. Just harvest the low hanging fruit, in business
jargon terms.

In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote:

In message , at 14:20:03 on Thu, 18 Feb
2016, d remarked:
Interesting:


https://thestack.com/security/2016/0...t-causes-faceb
ook-furore/

Obviously public transport is a prime place for this to happen given the
crowding but a couple of things:

- Surely a POS terminal is linked to a traceable bank account which means
as soon as someone complains then the games up isn't it? Unless they're
even set the bank account and POS account up as another unsuspecting
victim.
- Wifi doesn't work well in the tube. Though LU have helpfully put it in
most (all?) underground stations now so I guess thats not an issue.

Or just keep your contactless card in your wallet next to an Oyster,
and the "card clash" will ensure neither can be read.

Does that work? Card clash usually results in one card being read, more
often than not, surely?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In message , at 15:23:35
on Thu, 18 Feb 2016, remarked:

Or just keep your contactless card in your wallet next to an Oyster,
and the "card clash" will ensure neither can be read.

Does that work? Card clash usually results in one card being read, more
often than not, surely?

That may be the case for two bank cards, but I think an Oyster and a
bank card simultaneously would confuse the reader into charging neither.
--
Roland Perry

On Fri, 19 Feb 2016 07:33:28 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 15:23:35
on Thu, 18 Feb 2016, remarked:

Or just keep your contactless card in your wallet next to an Oyster,
and the "card clash" will ensure neither can be read.

Does that work? Card clash usually results in one card being read, more
often than not, surely?

That may be the case for two bank cards, but I think an Oyster and a
bank card simultaneously would confuse the reader into charging neither.

I'm not sure I'd want to rely on that TBH.

--
Spud

On 19/02/2016 09:26, d wrote:
On Fri, 19 Feb 2016 07:33:28 +0000
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 15:23:35
on Thu, 18 Feb 2016, remarked:

Or just keep your contactless card in your wallet next to an Oyster,
and the "card clash" will ensure neither can be read.

Does that work? Card clash usually results in one card being read, more
often than not, surely?

That may be the case for two bank cards, but I think an Oyster and a
bank card simultaneously would confuse the reader into charging neither.

I'm not sure I'd want to rely on that TBH.


Fair, but how realistic is this? To make it worth their while (to fund
the machine, with the risk of being caught and having the sh*t kicked
out of them or end up in jail) they would have to successfully tap
hundreds of contactless bank cards and collect the cash before their
merchant account was stopped.

If one were caught out in this way, if there were hundreds of other
transactions by the same merchant that were being questioned, I wouldn't
think there was any question of it not being fraudulent and prompt
refunds would/should be provided.