Fortunately that means ~100% of those numbers are expired by now. Can expired numbers be used for anything evil?
Edit: cushman beat me to it
Since some companies issue cards that are good for 4 years, I'd say many of those people have good reasons to worry.
a system that basically needs an attacker to just see'n'remember both sides of your card (that you need to keep with you and not is safe) in order be able pay with your money until the card gets disabled or expires.
i noticed in the US people use it to pay by phone, and shops tend to keep that data for convenient repeat purchases.
i need a card for payments online and visits outside europe (especially visits to the US). i'm glad that i have one for those occasions, but i cannot say i think it is a safe system -- it is also constantly under attack.
in the netherlands there's a payment system that most-if-not-all webshops are subscribing to. it redirect you from the shop to the internet banking app of your own bank, there you pay (with some 2-factor kind of authentication), after which you're redirected back. i cannot help feeling a lot safer. :)
By law, consumers are liable for at most $50 if their credit card info is used fraudulently by someone else.
Credit card companies validate transactions against statistical models in an attempt to head off anything suspicious. EDIT: Thanks for reminding me of this, nialo.
But often, it's the merchants who bear the cost of a fraudulent transaction. They have the least power to encourage more secure alternatives, because everyone already expects to be able to buy online with a credit card.
Card companies in the US do have something similar to the system you mention called 3-D Secure[1], but it hasn't gained wide traction. The interface is implemented so badly and inconsistently that it looks like a phishing scam. But more fundamentally, consumers have no incentive to use it, since it shifts more liability onto them.
The point is that the system has effectively figured out that they can't make a system that is both sufficiently secure and sufficiently convenient in just a card, so it instead accepts that numbers will be stolen and tries to minimize the damage.
then Sony says:
"While the two systems are distinct and operated separately, given that they are both under the SONY umbrella, there is some degree of architecture that overlaps."
This my friends is back-peddling 101. Also known as "Sony can't give a straight answer on whether their PSN and SOE networks are connected or not"
Are you sure it's not just "Sony can't give a straight answer"?
Take your pick from:
* SOE Scandal
* PSN Scandal
* OtherOS removal
* GeoHot Scandal
* The BMG Rootkit Scandal
* The Master Key Scandal
And many, many more. I don't think they've been straight with their customers or the general public even once unless they've been caught out.
- Minidisc - Memory stick - The 2005 audio CDs with bonus rootkit - PSN breach - SOE breach
They've messed up a few things, but they still make good consumer products. I purchased a SONY TV and Blu Ray a year or two ago and I'm very happy with it.
They're clearly not perfect, but to say everything they've done since the walkman has been a disaster isn't really fair.
Their laptops have tremendous numbers of mechanical failures. Their eReaders are slow, have glare, and have serious usability issues -- e.g. the page turn buttons are located in a spot where you can't comfortably press them. They bought Minolta, and ran it into the ground -- they've been promising a successor to the a700 for close to 5 years now without being able to ship. The lower-end cameras are innovative, but have serious, serious usability issues. The Minolta 5D was a wonderful camera. The early Sony successors copied and improved on it (a700 was the most usable camera ever made -- and the only one with a useful auto mode). The current ones made a new, broken interface. The support is gone -- warranty issues don't get fixed, and if you buy from Sony direct, heaven help you if you want a return.
Your TV and Blu Ray aren't bad, but a bit overpriced and slightly lower quality relative to the competition.
But that's not the point. 20 years ago, Sony was like Apple or Trader Joes. You couldn't go wrong buying from them. The quality was spectacular. Sony products didn't break. Today, you go wrong buying from them 95% of the time. 5% of their products are market-leading. They ship known defective products. It's a very different company.
In terms of bringing gaming to the masses, you're thinking of the Nintendo, first with the NES, and many years later with the Wii.
If they 'lose' that it isn't my problem.
I think that's going to be the only way I'll by something from there.
How often does this type of thing happen and no one has ANY idea?
