From: “E. ALLEN SMITH” <EALLENSMITH@ocelot.Rutgers.EDU>
To: adam@lighthouse.homeport.org
Message Hash: eee5a986c02575bffec2e3b87d20e14abfb935a9a9f4ea747823bed5cce20895
Message ID: <01I3IDEMJXFW8Y51D0@mbcl.rutgers.edu>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-04-14 05:46:32 UTC
Raw Date: Sun, 14 Apr 1996 13:46:32 +0800
From: "E. ALLEN SMITH" <EALLENSMITH@ocelot.Rutgers.EDU>
Date: Sun, 14 Apr 1996 13:46:32 +0800
To: adam@lighthouse.homeport.org
Subject: Re: (Fwd) British Study Claims That Photo Credit Cards Don't
Message-ID: <01I3IDEMJXFW8Y51D0@mbcl.rutgers.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
From: IN%"adam@lighthouse.homeport.org" "Adam Shostack" 8-APR-1996 22:47:00.53
> Most merchant agreements prohibit asking for more ID beyond
>the card.
Umm... how many places have you seen with a minimum amount chargable?
That isn't allowed by _any_ of the merchant agreements that I know of, and
I've seen a lot of places do it anyway. How's the card company going to notice?
Most people use cash for small stuff anyway.
>cpunk relevance? Most security that relies on people being awake is
>broken. Security that relies on people with no financial interest in
>a transactions security is broken. Studying how security breaks today
>is a good idea.
Quite.
-Allen
Return to April 1996
Return to ““E. ALLEN SMITH” <EALLENSMITH@ocelot.Rutgers.EDU>”
1996-04-14 (Sun, 14 Apr 1996 13:46:32 +0800) - Re: (Fwd) British Study Claims That Photo Credit Cards Don’t - “E. ALLEN SMITH” <EALLENSMITH@ocelot.Rutgers.EDU>