Fighting Fraud by Following the Customer
 

Fighting Fraud by Following the Customer | PYMNTS.com



We already use CA UIM/Spectra and NFA :thumbsup

Great article and right on about finding the perfect combination of security measures without compromising user experience.

Check 21 and ach may receive a bump as merchants look for alternatives.

I really tried to read that article, and it was so "broad" in it's underlying points that it just gave me a headache.

To me, fraud problem exists on 2 levels in adult. Real fraud typically by affiliates (easy to catch) and friendly fraud. For me, friendly fraud is just so much more of a concern then the real fraud.

True fraud you can analyze the failed transactions. Look for use of stolen cards and CVV2 mismatches. Look at the overall behavior of that affiliate. Make a decision. That of course, means you need to store the failed attempts and be able to associate all of it, to the affiliate, in an easy to follow manner. I bet most don't have the capability.

Friendly fraud, well, figure out a way to minimize that and you will be very rich. Someone mentioned a "chip" type purchase. Those chips can be used on a multitude of sites. Scrub really hard the initial purchase of chips, then the use of those chips can never be chargedback on participating sites. That also eliminates the recurring structure, ... which many operations need to sustain.

Stolen cards are pretty hard to catch in a card not present environment. I always have my merchants verify CVV and zip for an approval.

Friendly fraud is going to exist regardless of what measures you put in place. Having a clear and concise descriptor and contact information helps to an extent - but as long as the customer only has to pick up a phone to initiate a charge back, it will always exist.

Accepting ach or check 21, at least it makes the dispute a little more difficult - requiring customers to walk into a bank, sign paperwork stating the charges were not authorized and then having to open a new bank account. Most customers will just opt to call the merchant and cancel instead of going through that hassle.

Maybe if there was a way to do like an AVS using ip addresses for card not present transaction, that might help fight fraud.

That is true. True in mainstream as well. I was thinking of setting up an Amazon store, and selling silver. Until I started looking around on some of the underground forums. People out there that will give you 80% back on big purchases they keep 20%. You send the guy a packing slip, he sends a pic of an empty box and the packing slip to Amazon to get a refund.

Got a bad feeling that people will just move their fraud online (online stores and western union transfers) from the stores. Just like when the Gov started watching for Federal Tax Fraud, the bad guys switched to State Tax Fraud.

Unless there is a way to substitute the swipe (like using a registered IP from your phone or tablet) and capturing the the signature...fraud is going to continue.

I ran an important electronics business 10 or so year ago and I had chargebacks where I had zipcode and signature matches. V/MC...whoever it was...claimed the recipient of the package was not cardholder and it was my responsibility 3k miles away. I never understood how I wasn't protected. You cant win.

Like what I said before, moving to ACH makes customers think twice about reporting the fraud. The problem with ACH is that there is no system to check current balances and debit immediately. The banks can, they choose not to. They make more money sitting on that cash in the accounts that extra day.