Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!know!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!decwrl!hayes.fai.alaska.edu!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request
From: dhepner@hpcuhc.cup.hp.com (Dan Hepner)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Fraudulent Coin Calls
Message-ID: <13166@accuvax.nwu.edu>
Date: 9 Oct 90 00:25:27 GMT
Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu
Organization: TELECOM Digest
Lines: 48
Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 722, Message 8 of 9


[The Moderator writes]

>It still does not lessen the illegality of it, nor for MCI.
>You cannot take a group of people, based on their ethnic origin, for
>example Chinese or Egyptian people -- and who, after all, would be the
>most likely users of international calls to those countries? -- and
>say or imply to them "you cannot be trusted to make a call to your
>home country on credit; you are likely to defraud us."

Why not, assuming one had the evidence in hand that a particular call
attempt was probably fraudulent?  This seems to have little to do with
ethnic origin and much more to do with a systematic analysis of actual
fraud.  Given the very low actual marginal cost to the phone company
of allowing one fraudulent call, it seems hard to believe that any
carrier would dissallow entire classes of calls unless presented with
evidence showing genuinely massive fraud.

I'm puzzled by the Moderator's strong stance on this issue; does he
have reason to believe that there really isn't massive fraud?  Does he 
suggest that massive fraud must be tolerated (and paid for by you 
know who) to protect some "presumption of innocence"?  Does he actually 
believe that MCI or AT&T really don't want the money of certain ethnics?


Dan Hepner
dhepner@hpda.hp.com


[Moderator's Note: In lots of other ways, 'presumption of innocence'
is a very important and desirable attitude, regardless of cost. Why do
the telcos get to be an exception?  Yes, there are problems with
fraud, but there are protective techniques in place. A call 24 hours
per day to AT&T at 800-222-0300 will put an immediate stop to charging
on a stolen card. I've done it when my card was stolen. The hot PIN
goes on a negative list in the computer and presto: no more charges
allowed to that number and PIN. How does VISA, American Express or
Diner's deal with a stolen card? How do banks deal with stolen ATM
cards?  Even if you did have massive evidence of fraud from a certain
group -- and the Nigerian credit card ring working here in Chicago
last year was a good example of this -- the federal law in the United
States regards credit opportunities is plain: you deal with *single
individuals* and their credit-worthieness, not with groups of people.
And personally, no I do not think the people of any one country are
more likely to commit fraud than another country. Even the 'Nigerian
problem' here a year ago did not indict all Nigerians. Visa, Diner's
and American Express cannot turn down citizens of China, Israel or
India as a class; AT&T / MCI should not be allowed to do it either.  PAT]