Re:IAmA a malware coder and botnet operator, AMA
by simonsarris on Friday May 11, 2012 @02:51PM
(#3960696)
Well this could be because US credit cards are magnetic and UK ones are (much more secure) chip-and-pin cards.
Re:IAmA a malware coder and botnet operator, AMA
by farnsworth on Friday May 11, 2012 @03:53PM
(#3961020)
Yeah, this has got to be it. Non-US CC info seems much more difficult to acquire, and thus more valuable. And just because Americans are in debt (obviously not all) doesn't mean their credit cards are maxed out.
Re:IAmA a malware coder and botnet operator, AMA
by jlgreco on Friday May 11, 2012 @05:00PM
(#3961383)
There is however likely a difference in average credit limit on cards of citizens of countries with different economies.
Re:IAmA a malware coder and botnet operator, AMA
by blackman on Sunday May 13, 2012 @09:13AM
(#3966896)
I know that the criminals probably haven't caught up and this technology may not be widespread (so your argument holds)
but...
chip and pin is definitely broken (defcon presentation) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JABJlvrZWbY
Re:IAmA a malware coder and botnet operator, AMA
by Retric on Friday May 11, 2012 @04:15PM
(#3961160)
It's because you can't do a charge-back with a UK card and get your money back.
Re:IAmA a malware coder and botnet operator, AMA
by barrkel on Saturday May 12, 2012 @02:54AM
(#3963056)
Unless charge-back means something different to what I think it does, of course you can with a UK card. The terms and conditions may be different, but the usual fraud etc. is covered.
Re:IAmA a malware coder and botnet operator, AMA
by Retric on Saturday May 12, 2012 @09:58AM
(#3963852)
If you have a problem with a purchase made by credit card or via a credit agreement offered by a retailer, you may be protected under section 75 of the Consumer Credit Act. This makes the credit provider jointly liable with the retailer for anything you buy, provided the item costs between £100 and £30,000. ... Purchases made on debit or prepaid cards or chargecards are not covered by section 75. Neither are purchases on credit cards that are worth less than £100 or more than £30,000. However, your card provider may offer chargeback.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2012/jan/20/section-75-charg...
Anything under £100 and might be out of luck.
Take Mastercard's scheme
• The cover applies to Mastercard debit cards, prepaid cards and Maestro cards, and to purchases made on a Mastercard credit card which don't qualify for section 75 cover
• There is a minimum spend of £10 but no upper limit on spending
PS: Subsection (1) does not apply to a claim—
(a)under a non-commercial agreement, F1. . .
(b)so far as the claim relates to any single item to which the supplier has attached a cash price not exceeding [F2£100] or more than [F3£30,000][F4, or]
Re:IAmA a malware coder and botnet operator, AMA
by barrkel on Saturday May 12, 2012 @11:25AM
(#3964119)
I've had to do it twice so far, never had a problem, and all for purchases (actually, things like London congestion charge fine payments, as well as pizza deliveries etc.) under 100 GBP. The way I see it, the law describes minimums; banks, on the other hand, may want to keep customers.
Re:IAmA a malware coder and botnet operator, AMA
by dennisgorelik on Friday May 11, 2012 @07:43PM
(#3962013)
I assume that's because in the US responsibility for the fraudulent purchase is on the merchant, while in UK customer is more likely to hold the bag.
> a US credit card costs 2$ on the black market and a UK starts at 60$, americans are all in debt.