[Rhodes22-list] Wally said, "...? ... comments on Obama [Political]
Michael D. Weisner
mweisner at ebsmed.com
Sun Nov 2 08:39:26 EST 2008
Herb,
As I have said, it is common practice not to require CVV/CVV2
authentication.
I just placed an order for flea & tick preparation for my dog at
www.pets-megastore.com and there was no request for CVV/CVV2. Since I
wanted the product shipped to my home which is also the credit card billing
address, I cannot comment on whether they performed an AVS test.
I also paid an invoice from Airgas (a supplier) by web this morning. Their
site (www.airgas.com ) requires CVV only when using Discover cards as
follows:
For your online shopping safety and security, we require that you
enter your card's verification number. This added step helps to
ensure your credit card information is not being used fraudulently.
If you are using a Discover Card, you must provide the card's
CVV number. This is the 3-digit number on the back of your card.
It appears after and to the right of your card number on the
signature
panel on the back of the credit card.
There is no "making excuses" for anyone. The practice of accepting credit
cards without requesting full fraud prevention details may be risky if one
wants to be paid, but certainly not inexcusable and is commonplace.
Go find another person or two to irritate today.
Mike
s/v Shanghaid'd Summer ('81)
Nissequogue River, NY
From: "Herb Parsons" <hparsons at parsonsys.com> Sent: Sunday, November 02,
2008 12:52 AM
You may or may not appreciate it, but it's my opinion. I'm definitely
entitled to it. And, you've done nothing to dissuade me. The practice
that he is doing is inexcusable. It appears to me you are making excuses
for him (as I said, it's my opinion).
Convince me differently. Show me a few of those sites that you're
talking about where one can pay under a name and address that's
different than what's on their card, and not put in the security numbers.
I don't think you're going to.
Michael D. Weisner wrote:
> Herb,
>
> You are entitled to hold whatever opinion you wish but I do not appreciate
> your statement "you're simply excusing (again) the questionable behavior
> of
> your chosen one." I have no idea why you would come to that conclusion
> since I have not excused anyone and he is certainly not my chosen one!
>
> The workings of your mind never cease to amaze me.
>
> Mike
> s/v Shanghaid'd Summer ('81)
> Nissequogue River, NY
>
> From: "Herb Parsons" hparsons at parsonsys.com Sent: Saturday, November 01,
> 2008 11:41 AM
> 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
>> __________________________________________________
>>
>>
>>
>>
> __________________________________________________
> 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