[Wolves] credit card signatures etc

Old Dan dan at dannyboy.dnsalias.org
Tue Apr 6 16:03:47 BST 2004


> I'm kind of a new reader of GLLUG (Greater London?) and they're in the
> middle of a conversation/thread on the new pin codes coming in for
> switch etc and how a pin code is only 10 bit security while a signature
> is/should be a bit more .... and this nice url came up...
>
> http://www.thescreamonline.com/cartoons/cartoons3-3/
:) LOL

> Being the sad sad sad person I am, I couldn't stop laughing as I read
> it. Perhaps I'll be alone in this, or maybe I ate something a bit wacky
> for lunch (working in this place kind of does that too)....
>
> Anyway, even though the article is written by an American, I don't
> somehow think it's any different over here.........

I do think the idea of completely replacing signatures is a stupid one. 
The problem with signatures not being checked is a simple one of - well -
signatures not being checked rather than a fundamental flaw in the
signature system itself.

I can see major problems with PIN numbers though.  All someone would have
to do is find out your PIN (say by standing behind you in a supermarket
queue and watching you enter it - not as hard as it seems, have you ever
tried watching someone at a cash machine?  Sometimes people are so obvious
it's hard /not/ to see the numbers they're pressing, and that's at a
set-back-from-direct-view ATM...), steal your bag/wallet then go to the
next shop or whatever and go wild before you have even noticed it missing.
 Not to mention that most people will prefer to have the same PIN for each
card they have.

At least it takes some practice to forge a signature.  I'm guessing the
rationale behind this is more to do with online card fraud(which this will
make harder) than the on-the-street variety but I'm really not sure they
have thought out the implications of it.  Maybe a PIN system specifically
for online transactions would be a better idea.

::shrug::

-- 
Dan



More information about the Wolves mailing list