[Rhodes22-list] Wally said, "...? ... comments on Obama [Political]

Herb Parsons hparsons at parsonsys.com
Sat Nov 1 11:41:02 EDT 2008 

I'm looking forward to hearing from you on it, since they are so common, 
I wouldn't think it would take long to come across one or two of them.

In the meantime, you'll pardon my cynicism if I hold to the opinion that 
you're simply excusing (again) the questionable behavior of  your chosen 
one.

Michael D. Weisner wrote:
> Herb,
>
> It is not unusual to come across a site that does not require CVV/CVV2 to 
> authorize a credit card purchase.  In addition to splitting the processing 
> functions from online POS to offline to speed processing on very busy 
> servers, one of the most popular open source e-commerce designs, OSCommerce 
> (www.oscommerce.com), did not utilize full credit card authorization 
> functions unless using a payment gateway.  Check out the discussions that 
> are still a daily event concerning CVV/CVV2 on their forum.( 
> http://addons.oscommerce.com/info/6307 )  My sites have always used every 
> fraud prevention capability of the system but not all think this way.
>
> When I come across a site that does not require CVV/CVV2 authorization, I 
> will forward the url to you.
>
> Mike
> s/v Shanghaid'd Summer ('81)
>        Nissequogue River, NY
>
> From: "Herb Parsons" <hparsons at parsonsys.com>Sent: Friday, October 31, 2008 
> 11:39 PM
> Michael,
>
> You wrote:
>
> "Due to volume, some credit card acceptance sites have relaxed their
> requirements to reduce the website service load and perform more
> involved checks at the time that the charge is actually processed. This
> would permit ..."
>
> I was curious if you could name any other "sites" besides Obama's.
>
>
>
> Michael D. Weisner wrote:
>   
>> Herb,
>>
>> What are you talking about?
>>
>> Mike
>> s/v Shanghai'd Summer ('81)
>> Nissequogue River, NY
>>
>> From: "Herb Parsons" <hparsons at parsonsys.com>Sent: Friday, October 31, 
>> 2008
>> 4:16 PM
>> "Some" have done this?
>>
>> I'm curious, which other sites have done this? Can you give me some
>> examples, say two?
>>
>> Michael D. Weisner wrote:
>>
>>     
>>> Brad,
>>>
>>> I commented a bit ago about the possible credit card fraud that these
>>> practices encourage.  You said that you had created a bogus donation with
>>> your credit card information.  I am curious if the transaction actually
>>> went
>>> through.  Yes, I know that the site "accepted" the information, but has
>>> the
>>> charge shown up on your account?
>>>
>>> Due to volume, some credit card acceptance sites have relaxed their
>>> requirements to reduce the website service load and perform more involved
>>> checks at the time that the charge is actually processed.  This would
>>> permit
>>> the site to enforce AVS, although CVV/CVV2 would not be possible since 
>>> the
>>> information had not been collected.  As a note, CVV/CVV2 is not required
>>> by
>>> our credit card processor, even for transactions of this type (card not 
>>> in
>>> hand) and even AVS can be overridden, as long as the acceptance site is
>>> willing to be subject to charge reversal and fee.
>>>
>>> >From a legal standpoint, I truly wonder if the practice of accepting
>>> donations in this way can be deemed criminal (I'm not a lawyer.)  I seem
>>> to
>>> remember that providing fraudulent information in a financial transaction
>>> may indeed be illegal.
>>>
>>> Mike
>>> s/v Shanghaid'd Summer ('81)
>>>        Nissequogue River, NY
>>>
>>> From: "Brad Haslett" <flybrad at gmail.com>Sent: Friday, October 31, 2008
>>> 8:37
>>> AM
>>> Ed,
>>>
>>> This man/crook is the most polished liar in all the time I've been
>>> following politics.  What is taking place with the credit card
>>> fundraising is criminal.  This post (below) is from an industry
>>> insider who chooses to remain anonymous for obvious reasons.  Everyone
>>> has seen what The One and his minions tried to do to "Joe the Plumber"
>>> using illegal violations of privacy using government databases.
>>>
>>> Brad
>>>
>>> --------
>>>
>>> Because many of our colleagues in the media have failed to investigate
>>> the shenanigans of the Obama Campaign, I have taken upon myself to
>>> uncover some improprieties. One that has troubled me greatly is
>>> Obama's very relaxed donation policies.
>>>
>>> I have over 8 years experience working in the payment services industry.
>>> By
>>> taking a closer look at Obama's online donation site, I have noticed that
>>> his team has left the door wide open for credit card fraud by not putting
>>> in
>>> the security measures to ensure full visa/mastercard authorization
>>> compliance. This is outright irresponsible behavior on the part of 
>>> Obama's
>>> team and in direct violation of their agreement with Visa/Mastercard.
>>>
>>> I did a test on his site. Acting as Joe Stalin, I went onto the Obama 
>>> site
>>> and donated $5.00. I used false information, address: 100 Red Square,
>>> telephone number 323-666-1953, zip code 10001, Employer: Kremlin
>>> Occupation: Dictator. I did use my valid credit card numbers and
>>> expiration
>>> date. The typical security measures, Address Verification System and the
>>> Card Validation Code are not present on the Obama site. So there is
>>> nothing
>>> in place to verify who I am. (Please see attachment. [I have his
>>> attachment. I see no point in putting it up; we all know Obama's site
>>> allows this -- ace.]) I clicked submit. The transaction went through.
>>>
>>> Then I went to McCain's site, and entered in the same information. Joe
>>> Stalin. $5.00. As you can see, my donation was rejected for errors.
>>>
>>> * What's the big deal? Obama has left the door open for anyone to run
>>> prepaid cards and foreign credit cards without proper screening. In
>>> addition, it is easy to run multi-transactions on the same card but
>>> under different aliases. In other words, an organization like Move
>>> On.org could run tens of thousands of transactions for millions of
>>> dollars using essentially cards belonging to only handful of very
>>> large liberal donors like George Soros, Peter Lewis and Eric Schmidt.
>>>
>>> In addition, Obama's site violates his agreement with Visa/Mastercard.
>>> Visa Mastercard regulations require each credit card acceptor to
>>> "obtain the 3 digit Card Validation Code [CVV2 found on the back of
>>> your credit card. 4 digits for American Express Cards] and submit this
>>> code with all authorization requests with respect to transactions
>>> where the card is not present..." [cite:] Visa/Master Program Guide.
>>>
>>> (Please see attachment or go to Obama's site. You will notice that
>>> Obama's donation site does not have this code requirement, which is in
>>> direct violation of Visa/Mastercard regulations.)
>>>
>>> Speculations as to why?
>>>
>>> Many foreign credit cards do not have CVV2 codes. Requiring such codes
>>> would limit foreign donations.
>>>
>>> Secondly, disabling the security allows would be credit card thieves to
>>> "ping" numbers till they get a hit. In other words, a crook could simply
>>> type in random numbers until he found one sequence that worked in some
>>> fashion. That could give a thief a starting point for committing
>>> credit-card fraud. If all they had to do was type nonsense values for
>>> names and addresses, such as Doodad Pro, they could quickly determine
>>> which numbers were valid - and they could probably program bots to do
>>> that kind of work.
>>>
>>> [I consider this latter point a minor concern, given the fact that
>>> most fraudulent donors are willing coconspirators, not credit card
>>> thieves. However, it is interesting that Obama invites this sort of
>>> fraud, and doesn't take the most elemental step to eliminate it --
>>> indeed, he is in direct violation of Visa/Master Card rules in failing
>>> to ask for this code. Why? Because he wants foreign donations, and
>>> he's willing to facilitate the occasional credit-card thief to get
>>> them. -- ace.]
>>>
>>> No Address Verification System (AVS)
>>>
>>> The Value of AVS from a credit card exper: I have over 30 years of
>>> experience in investigating Credit Card Fraud and I can tell you, which
>>> you
>>> may or may not know, that the merchant acquirer that is conducting the
>>> collection of credit / debit card for the Obama campaign are responsible
>>> for
>>> the actions to be taken regarding the Address Verification System
>>> responses.
>>> The value of the AVS system is that the issuer of the card being used
>>> provides back to the merchant acquirer a response based upon the
>>> information
>>> provided during the authorization process. This response indicates to the
>>> merchant acquirer if the card information was validated as to
>>> ownership of the account. It is the merchant acquirer that determines
>>> what to do when
>>> the authorization response is received. In most cases the transaction 
>>> that
>>> comes back with any negative meaning is denied. However, if the
>>> merchant acquirer has adjusted their system to accept any response as
>>> acceptable the transaction would be completed.
>>>
>>> The value of the AVS system is to deny Card Not Present transactions 
>>> (CNP)
>>> which are suspicious. This protects the merchant against charge backs for
>>> bad transactions. What is interesting to me is that the merchant acquirer
>>> has knowingly violated a basic CNP fraud prevention technique to
>>> accommodate a merchant (Obama Campaign). I think that both the
>>> Associations (VISA & MasterCard) would be highly interested in looking
>>> at the merchant acquirer that was processing these transactions. The
>>> value of ignoring the AVS
>>> responses is that multiple invalid transactions may be made without
>>> fear of being rejected by the authorization systems. This means that
>>> the real owner
>>> of the credit card account is willing to allow multiple transactions
>>> to be made on the account using different names and addresses that
>>> under normal conditions would be denied. The merchant acquirer has a
>>> complete listing of all transactions done and it would be very
>>> interesting to see how many transactions were conducted on the same
>>> account number using different names. I would think that this would be
>>> a Federal violation under the current campaign funding laws.
>>>
>>> I hope you will take this inquiry seriously. I want a fair election. I do
>>> not want either side to STEAL the election literally. Obama's tactics 
>>> have
>>> gone too far in my opinion. McCain is doing the honorable thing on his
>>> site
>>> and playing by the rules. Obama is in clear violation of the rules. Is
>>> this change we can believe in?
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 7:14 AM, Tootle <ekroposki at charter.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>       
>>>> Wally said, "Who said they were? "
>>>>
>>>> If you listen to the Main Stream Media, Obama gets 95 %, 97 % of black
>>>> people and gets high percentage of whites who feel guilt without 
>>>> analysis
>>>> of
>>>> the man's background, beliefs, real political contributions, etc.
>>>>
>>>> I have said it before and say it again, I have been fortunate to be
>>>> personally acquainted with people who have held high political office, 
>>>> in
>>>> both parties.  I have known many good, honest and dedicated people in
>>>> that
>>>> group.
>>>>
>>>> I have personally known people of all races who were honest leaders.
>>>>
>>>> I have also been exposed to devious and down right crooks.  I access Mr.
>>>> Obama as less than honest and more devious.
>>>>
>>>> See attached political cartoon:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.nabble.com/file/p20264705/fallowers.gif fallowers.gif
>>>>
>>>> It was posted on this forum by one of those behind 'Obama' that he,
>>>> 'Obama,
>>>> is a friggin genius'.  I have not seen any evidence of superior
>>>> intellect.
>>>> He has not submitted his college record as real proof of achievement.
>>>> All
>>>> that may be the result of quotas, glibness and parroting back the
>>>> professor's views.
>>>>
>>>> Rather my assessment is that most members of this forum possess equal or
>>>> greater intellect and abilities, you included.
>>>>
>>>> I have seen too many Elmer Gantry's to follow one on so little evidence.
>>>> I
>>>> have too often experienced people who had the ability to look you or
>>>> others
>>>> in the eye and constantly lie.  I believe he is a polished deceiver.
>>>>
>>>> Ed K
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 9:01 AM, Tootle <ekroposki at charter.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>         
>>>>> Not all black men are sheep.  Here is the opinion of one who is not:
>>>>>
>>>>> Oct. 29, 2008
>>>>> A perfect storm
>>>>> By Thomas Sowell
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.JewishWorldReview.com <http://www.jewishworldreview.com/> |
>>>>> Some elections are routine, some are
>>>>> important and some are historic. If Senator John McCain wins this
>>>>> election,
>>>>> it will probably go down in history as routine. But if Senator Barack
>>>>> Obama
>>>>> wins, it is more likely to be historic— and catastrophic.
>>>>>
>>>>> Once the election is over, the glittering generalities of rhetoric and
>>>>> style
>>>>> will mean nothing. Everything will depend on performance in facing huge
>>>>> challenges, domestic and foreign.
>>>>>
>>>>> Performance is where Barack Obama has nothing to show for his political
>>>>> career, either in Illinois or in Washington.
>>>>>
>>>>> Policies that he proposes under the banner of "change" are almost all
>>>>> policies that have been tried repeatedly in other countries— and failed
>>>>> repeatedly in other countries.
>>>>>
>>>>> Politicians telling businesses how to operate? That's been tried in
>>>>> countries around the world, especially during the second half of the
>>>>> 20th
>>>>> century. It has failed so often and so badly that even socialist and
>>>>> communist governments were freeing up their markets by the end of the
>>>>> century.
>>>>>
>>>>> Every weekday NewsAndOpinion.com publishes what many in the media and
>>>>> Washington consider "must-reading". HUNDREDS of columnists and
>>>>> cartoonists
>>>>> regularly appear. Sign up for the daily update. It's free. Just click
>>>>> here.
>>>>>
>>>>> The economies of China and India began their take-off into high rates 
>>>>> of
>>>>> growth when they got rid of precisely the kinds of policies that Obama
>>>>> is
>>>>> advocating for the United States under the magic mantra of "change."
>>>>>
>>>>> Putting restrictions on international trade in order to save jobs at
>>>>> home?
>>>>> That was tried here with the Hawley-Smoot tariff during the Great
>>>>> Depression.
>>>>>
>>>>> Unemployment was 9 percent when that tariff was passed to save jobs, 
>>>>> but
>>>>> unemployment went up instead of down, and reached 25 percent before the
>>>>> decade was over.
>>>>>
>>>>> Higher taxes to "spread the well around," as Obama puts it? The idea of
>>>>> redistributing wealth has turned into the reality of redistributing
>>>>> poverty,
>>>>> in countries where wealth has fled and the production of new wealth has
>>>>> been
>>>>> stifled by a lack of incentives.
>>>>>
>>>>> Economic disasters, however, may pale by comparison with the 
>>>>> catastrophe
>>>>> of
>>>>> Iran with nuclear weapons. Glib rhetoric about Iran being "a small
>>>>> country,"
>>>>> as Obama called it, will be a bitter irony for Americans who will have
>>>>> to
>>>>> live in the shadow of a nuclear threat that cannot be deterred, as that
>>>>> of
>>>>> the Soviet Union could be, by the threat of a nuclear counter-attack.
>>>>>
>>>>> Suicidal fanatics cannot be deterred. If they are willing to die and we
>>>>> are
>>>>> not, then we are at their mercy— and they have no mercy. Moreover, once
>>>>> they
>>>>> get nuclear weapons, that is a situation which cannot be reversed,
>>>>> either
>>>>> in
>>>>> this generation or in generations to come.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is this the legacy we wish to leave our children and grandchildren, by
>>>>> voting on the basis of style and symbolism, rather than substance?
>>>>>
>>>>> If Barack Obama thinks that such a catastrophe can be avoided by 
>>>>> sitting
>>>>> down and talking with the leaders of Iran, then he is repeating a
>>>>> fallacy
>>>>> that helped bring on World War II.
>>>>>
>>>>> In a nuclear age, one country does not have to send troops to occupy
>>>>> another
>>>>> country in order to conquer it. A country is conquered if another
>>>>> country
>>>>> can dictate who rules it, as the Mongols once did with Russia, and as
>>>>> Osama
>>>>> bin Laden tried to do when he threatened retaliation against places in
>>>>> the
>>>>> United States that voted for George W. Bush. But he didn't have nuclear
>>>>> weapons to back up that threat— yet.
>>>>>
>>>>> America has never been a conquered country, so it may be very hard for
>>>>> most
>>>>> Americans even to conceive what that can mean. After France was
>>>>> conquered
>>>>> in
>>>>> 1940, it was reduced to turning over some of its own innocent citizens
>>>>> to
>>>>> the Nazis to kill, just because those citizens were Jewish.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you think our leaders wouldn't do that? Not even if the alternative
>>>>> was
>>>>> to see New York and Los Angeles go up in mushroom clouds? If I were
>>>>> Jewish,
>>>>> I wouldn't bet my life on that.
>>>>>
>>>>> What the Middle East fanatics want is not just our resources or even 
>>>>> our
>>>>> lives, but our humiliation first, in whatever sadistic ways they can
>>>>> think
>>>>> of. Their lust for humiliation has already been repeatedly demonstrated
>>>>> in
>>>>> their videotaped beheadings that find such an eager market in the 
>>>>> Middle
>>>>> East.
>>>>>
>>>>> None of this can be prevented by glib talk, but only by character,
>>>>> courage
>>>>> and decisive actions— none of which Barack Obama has ever demonstrated.
>>>>>
>>>>> Posted by
>>>>> Ed K
>>>>> --
>>>>> View this message in context:
>>>>> http://www.nabble.com/An-African-American-comments-on-Obama--Political--tp20246512p20246512.html
>>>>> Sent from the Rhodes 22 mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>           
>>>> http://www.nabble.com/file/p20264705/fallowers.gif fallowers.gif
>>>> --
>>>> View this message in context:
>>>> http://www.nabble.com/An-African-American-comments-on-Obama--Political--tp20246512p20264705.html
>>>> Sent from the Rhodes 22 mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
>>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>         
>>> __________________________________________________
>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>
>>>
>>> __________________________________________________
>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>> __________________________________________________
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>       
>> __________________________________________________
>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>>
>> __________________________________________________
>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to 
>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>>
>>
>>     
> __________________________________________________
> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to 
> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
> __________________________________________________
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to http://www.rhodes22.org/list
> __________________________________________________
>
>
>

More information about the Rhodes22-list mailing list